'09 LMS Round 2, Spa May 8th-10th

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by XJR14/WSC95

Is it all down to the rule changes this year, the poor old R10 has been left behind by the rapid development of the rest of the field trying to claw back the seconds lost with the new Aero regs…

Yes, but let's also not forget that the R10 was a tricky car setup-wise and I doubt Kolles has the engineering depth of Audi. With an added 30 kgs, this car will be hopeless this weekend when everything else is compounded on this effort.

[Erw]

Looks like it might be a dry race? mmm nice

[Tom87]

Anyone else watching live qually?

Very strange, not sure why the Aston was facing the wrong way - did he spin leaving the pits?! Then then Pesca spun at La Source so red flag has been waved!

Edit: replay shows he just dropped it leaving La Source, but didn't seem to be able to get away, not sure whether the smoke from the car afterwards was cause or result...

[Tom87]

Plently more cars spinning, bringing another red...

Oreca parked at Bus Stop.

[ger80]

At least both R10 are faster then the Lavaggi

[NightStalk3r]

so safe to say the ACO's diesel tweaks have made zero difference.

[cdsvg]

Er, why? The 908s are three seconds slower.

[NightStalk3r]

Originally Posted by cdsavage

Er, why? The 908s are three seconds slower.

Still well over a second too fast.

[cdsvg]

But you are comparing two teams with vastly differing levels of resources. This isnt a performance-balanced series like GT3. It isnt the idea to adjust each entrant so that they all do the same lap time.

[NightStalk3r]

Originally Posted by cdsavage

But you are comparing two teams with vastly differing levels of resources. This isnt a performance-balanced series like GT3. It isnt the idea to adjust each entrant so that they all do the same lap time.

No the idea is to make the petrols and diesels level, and as qualliying has showed that is still not the case, the diesels are well over a second faster than that leading petrol cars.

[cdsvg]

Given the fact that Peugeot is a larger team with more resources than AMR, if both were lapping with the same times, the tweaks have gone too far. In that case, a team of peugeot's level entering a petrol car would have a distinct advantage. Should Brawn GP be given an extra 50kg of ballast just because they designed the better car / are the better team?

[NightStalk3r]

Originally Posted by cdsavage

Given the fact that Peugeot is a larger team with more resources than AMR, if both were lapping with the same times, the tweaks have gone too far. In that case, a team of peugeot's level entering a petrol car would have a distinct advantage. Should Brawn GP be given an extra 50kg of ballast just because they designed the better car / are the better team?

You've just contradicted yourself, your saying the team with the largest resources should have a distinct advantage, then you mention Brawn GP having the best car who redoubtably have the least resources in F1.

The simple fact is the diesels still have a big advantage, and will run away with it and make for yet another diesel fest at Le Mans.

[cdsvg]

What evidence is there that "Diesels", (not just Peugeot), enjoy an advantage? The gap between Peugeot and AMR is one second. The gap between AMR and Kolles, also a diesel team, is two seconds. Trying to claim that this is *obviously* some huge advantage given to all diesel cars is plain silly.

In no way did I claim that having a larger pool of resources should give one the right to expect to be at the front. Only that the gaps we are seeing are clearly explained in the same way you would explain the gaps between any of the petrol teams.

[Spyderman]

Would you bet against a diesel winning at Le Mans?

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by cdsavage

Trying to claim that this is *obviously* some huge advantage given to all diesel cars is plain silly.

My God, all one has to do is look at qualifying at Le Mans last year...6.6 seconds between the Peugeot and the 1st gas powered car. That's HUGE. And what has the ACO done since? Boost reduction, inlet restrictor reduction, and now they've added 30 kgs. They've chucked a lot at the diesels and only now are we seeing some time reduction.

[NightStalk3r]

The top 3 Petrols, all 3 from different manufacturers and teams were separated by 2 tenths, the gap from 3rd to 7th is the same as the gap between the pugs and the Aston, the 1.4 second gap to the Pugs is caused by the fact the Diesel regulations still give them a big advantage.

Using Kolles as an example is abit silly considering they have a slapped together 09 Aero kit, and drivers that are either brough in from single seaters with zero sportscar experience or drivers with a history of being crap.

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Would you bet against a diesel winning at Le Mans?

I wouldn't bet against and all Diesel podium, that 1.4 second advantage at spa is only going to get larger at Le Mans.

[JAG]

Little over a second gap to the Peugeot's is nothing at Spa, last season the difference was 4 seconds. At Silverstone for example the difference would be half a second at most.

It would have been interesting if Pescarolo had run their 908, I doubt they'd be on the ultimate pace of the factory cars.

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...=327172&FS=LMS

[NightStalk3r]

Originally Posted by JAG

Little over a second gap to the Peugeot's is nothing at Spa, last season the difference was 4 seconds. At Silverstone for example the difference would be half a second at most.

It would have been interesting if Pescarolo had run their 908, I doubt they'd be on the ultimate pace of the factory cars.

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...=327172&FS=LMS

But the ultimate goal of the new regs was for le mans equality, and last year the gap was larger at le mans than it was at spa, as it stands the gap at le mans would be about 2 seconds a lap or so.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by JAG

Little over a second gap to the Peugeot's is nothing at Spa, last season the difference was 4 seconds. At Silverstone for example the difference would be half a second at most.

It would have been interesting if Pescarolo had run their 908, I doubt they'd be on the ultimate pace of the factory cars.

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...=327172&FS=LMS

Didn't I read somewhere that Pescarolo wouldn't have the same spec level car as the factory team? That could have been my imagination though.

[cdsvg]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

My God, all one has to do is look at qualifying at Le Mans last year...6.6 seconds between the Peugeot and the 1st gas powered car. That's HUGE. And what has the ACO done since? Boost reduction, inlet restrictor reduction, and now they've added 30 kgs. They've chucked a lot at the diesels and only now are we seeing some time reduction.

To make it clear, I think this most recent reg change was a good thing. Without doubt, early on the diesel cars had a regs advantage.

My problem is with this sort of statement after qualifying today:

Originally Posted by NightStalk3r

...the 1.4 second gap to the Pugs is caused by the fact the Diesel regulations still give them a big advantage.

Look, I'm not trying to say that Peugeot are competing at the same level as AMR, Pescarolo, etc. Clearly they are a better team with a better car. I am just dumbfounded by this idea that the gap at the front is clearly due to the specifics of the engine regs, and has nothing to do with any other factors. How does one explain the other gaps among the field, most of which are much greater than the 1 second we are seing between Peugeot and AMR?

[Tom87]

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

Didn't I read somewhere that Pescarolo wouldn't have the same spec level car as the factory team? That could have been my imagination though.

Likewise I'm only quoting from memory, but I'm sure I read something about '08 spec internals with the '09 spec aero package.

I think the issue with the performance balancing between diesel and petrol is that both the only true big budget teams are both running diesel making it impossible to judge the relative advantage of the two engine alternatives.

As for this weekend I would say the times are around where they ought to be. The 908 has 3+ years of development and a massive budget, compared to brand new, lower budget cars from Aston, Oreca and Pescarolo, so it ought to be at least a little quicker!

Perhaps in the future if there is a more even spread of private and manufacturer teams and fuel options it will be easier to make it fair. If Audi ran a petrol and Oreca ran a Diesel then comparison would be easier as you would expect the Oreca & Pescarolo/Aston and the Peugeot and Audi to be equally matched given their relative budgets and car development.

All that said, the crucial lap times will come tomorrow, assuming Peugeot dares to show its hand to Audi - I doubt anyone thinks we've seen their ultimate pace and it may still be a country mile ahead of the petrol cars.

[Félix]

Concerning the Pescarolo 908, I've read Bruno Famin, Peugeot Sport technical boss, say, on EI, that the car will be a 2008 chassis with all the 2009 pieces except the most recent engine evolution. He says that over a lap, the gap should not be more than 1 second.

Interestingly, Peugeot won't be changing the 908's aero for this year, they don't know what the extra 30 kilos are going to do to the car, they are scheduling an unplanned 30 hour test to find out, they don't plan on beefing up suspension parts unless they break in the test and they're debuting a new gearbox casing this week-end.

Concerning their performance, it's quite obvious that they're not pushing and that this year they don't care about the championship and about ultimate pace. The other teams are trying for real. Peugeot have given their inexperienced drivers most of the track time this week-end and the car will probably lap quicker in the race tomorrow. You see what their state of mind is when they talk about testing parts and almost wanting the car to break here so they can repair it and take their time to understand the problem in the middle of the race, or not wanting to remove the air conditioning this weekend even if they were sure it would not be needed for cockpit temperature.


-----

Oh and there's also a quote of Famin saying: "The 2011 regs will make the gap with our opponents much closer because of the regs" So he seems to recognize it could be tighter.

[JAG]

Some comparisons for Spa, Barcelona and St Petes-


Spa

LMP1 (2009) (Diesel) - 2.01.056

LMP1 (2008) (Petrol) - 2.02.488

LMP1 (2008) (Diesel) - 1.58.069

LMP1 (2008) (Petrol) - 2.02.510

LMP2 (2008) - 2.07.918

LMP2 (2008) - 2.05.841

GT2 (2008) - 2.21.870

GT2 (2008)- 2.21.205

F1 (2007) - Pole 1.45.994 Last - 1.49.577

World Series by Renault (2008) - 2.02.118

DTM (2005) - 2.13.718

WTCC (2005) - 2.33.158


Barcelona

LMP1 (2009) (Diesel) - 1.34.266

LMP1 (2009) (Petrol) - 1.32.492

LMP1 (2008) (Diesel) - 1.31.875

LMP1 (2008) (Petrol) - 1.33.734

LMP2 (2009) - 1.36.156

LMP2 (2008) - 1.34.422

GT2 (2009) - 1.48.606

GT2 (2008) - 1.47.844

F1 (2009) Pole - 1.20.527 Last - 1:22.204

F1 (2008) Pole - 1.21.813 Last - 1.23.496


St Petes

LMP1 (2009) - 1.03.776

LMP1 (2008) - 1.02.825

LMP2 (2009) -1. 05.178

LMP2 (2008) - 1.03.578

GT2 (2009) - 1.12.892

GT2 (2008)- 1.11.745

IRL (2009) - 1.02.411

IRL (2008) - 1.02.532

[Félix]

Oh yeah, just read the Peugeot pole was made by Simon Pagenaud (not a bad driver at all but his very first race with the car) over ONE single flying lap!

[MulsanneMike]

Another thing about the Peugeot to consider...the car was running at 920 kgs at Sebring. 30 kgs means they are only adding 10 kgs to the total. So all their talk about testing to see what will break...? Not sure what to make of that.