The never ending Toyota return to Le Mans (LMP1) Saga

[cdsvg]

A Toyota statement said the new car "is planned to take part in a roll-out around the turn of the year prior to an extensive test schedule in early 2012."

Are we to take this to mean that the car has not begun track testing yet? If so, we can compare that to the Audi and Peugeot programs from last year, when they began testing several months before the end of the year, indeed as early as july for Peugeot. Naturally the drivetrain will already be well tested on the dyno.

As far as the rendering goes, I wouldnt get your hopes up (or the opposite) regarding the visuals - it looks very conservative to me, and I would guess it is just an artists impression that will end up looking nothing like the final car. Much like the red and white Peugeot concept from 2006.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by AGD

The advantage or disadvantage of not running before Le Mans is that nobody will know if adjustments to the rules will need to be made. Stuff like that is always hard to tell though.

Considering how many races Peugeot needed to perfect things not really related to engine performance at all... seems quite unlikely tactic to rely on what you're suggesting. Interesting but I'm not surprised that you're suggesting this.

[isynge]

Originally Posted by Acid09

I´m pretty sure they´ll do Spa at least, returning to Le Mans with a car that has never been raced is too much of a risk.

I don't think the regs as they stand allow you to debut a car at Le Mans.

As this is Toyota I imagine the ACO would be willing to waive this or see it as a case of force majeure, but my money would be on a dry run at Spa.

[The Badger]

Originally Posted by isynge

I don't think the regs as they stand allow you to debut a car at Le Mans.

As this is Toyota I imagine the ACO would be willing to waive this or see it as a case of force majeure, but my money would be on a dry run at Spa.

Pegasus did last year ..... Hope Polevision would have done with their hybrid .

[AGD]

Originally Posted by cdsvg

Naturally the drivetrain will already be well tested on the dyno.

Is it possible that the engine has been tested in the Dome (referencing back to the reason this thread was started to begin with)?

Originally Posted by deggis

Considering how many races Peugeot needed to perfect things not really related to engine performance at all... seems quite unlikely tactic to rely on what you're suggesting. Interesting but I'm not surprised that you're suggesting this.

I don't think a team should or does use politics as the primary reason whether to race or not, but it is a factor for sure. It's just something to add to the decision scales. The problem is that politics can be used both ways so it's not a slam dunk either way.

Originally Posted by isynge

I don't think the regs as they stand allow you to debut a car at Le Mans.

As this is Toyota I imagine the ACO would be willing to waive this or see it as a case of force majeure, but my money would be on a dry run at Spa.

I'd assume that Toyota will be at the Test Day if nothing else.

[vyselegend]

Originally Posted by cdsvg

Are we to take this to mean that the car has not begun track testing yet? If so, we can compare that to the Audi and Peugeot programs from last year, when they began testing several months before the end of the year, indeed as early as july for Peugeot.

Or we can compare Toyota's return to Peugeot's in 2007. The car first hit the track the 31 december 2006, and was race ready for Monza in april 2007, where it won. So it took them "only" four month to get the car reliable enough for a 6h event at decent pace.

Sure, they weren't ready to win LM, yet they were able to win 6/6 LMS races. I'm aware things have changed since then (especially the fact ILMC has nothing to do with LMS), but I don't see why Toyota's new car wouldn't be ready to race as soon as Spa, and even Sebring sounds plausible.

As for the drivers, one wise move would be to borrow Boullion from Rebellion. (but let's see what Rebellion does).

[Acid09]

Originally Posted by AGD

The car can be "ready," but I'm sure Toyota does not want to embarrass themselves by bringing a raw product to race on the big stage ala the AMR-One. Besides, Audi won Le Mans the last two years without racing their Le Mans car at Sebring. They won Sebring in 2009, but ended up falling flat on their faces at Le Mans. Now Audi has tested at Sebring even if they have not raced their cars there, but the actual race itself may not be absolutely necessary.

Yes but Audi has years of experience to work with, data, relationships between the drivers & the team and everything else.

Toyota won't just bring a new car, they will be an all-new team essentially that has been out of the endurance racing game for 13 years! Remember how long it took Peugeot to get decent pit stops done etc. , the crew will need time to adjust to the challenges.

That's why racing before Le Mans will be essential, even if the results won't be too spectacular.

Compare that to Peugeot's debut. The car ran first laps in late December 2006, roughly the same timeframe Toyota is planning with. The team did two races before Le Mans and still their effort was very rough around the edges that year...

Now we can argue that Japanese and Germans by nature tend to prepare a bit more carefully than the French and the team will show up a bit more drilled.. but still, a single race before Le Mans is the least they have to do to give everything a check under serious conditions.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

As for the drivers, one wise move would be to borrow Boullion from Rebellion. (but let's see what Rebellion does).

Boullion has been a loose cannon lately. I'm not sure if I'd go in that direction. Guy Smith and Bleekemolen, on the other hand, would be brilliant hires. Neither are full-time Rebellion guys of course, but they have the goods. We know about Guy.

Originally Posted by Acid09

Yes but Audi has years of experience to work with, data, relationships between the drivers & the team and everything else.

Toyota won't just bring a new car, they will be an all-new team essentially that has been out of the endurance racing game for 13 years! Remember how long it took Peugeot to get decent pit stops done etc. , the crew will need time to adjust to the challenges.

I hear you fully. I suggested earlier a few posts up that perhaps Toyota should borrow a car from Rebellion (or someone) to do the things you're talking about if the car is not ready in time.

[vyselegend]

Originally Posted by AGD

Boullion has been a loose cannon lately. I'm not sure if I'd go in that direction. Guy Smith and Bleekemolen, on the other hand, would be brilliant hires. Neither are full-time Rebellion guys of course, but they have the goods. We know about Guy.

Yes! I don't know how I managed to speak about borrowing drivers without mentioning him. And I agree Boullion has been quite disapointing lately, but it's like saying Mac Nish or TK has turned crap just because they did not well this season. Drivers of such calibre cannot be written off so easily. But I wonder if their (very) heavy open car experience is the reason they seem to struggle to adapt to the coupe's driving...

Originally Posted by AGD

I hear you fully. I suggested earlier a few posts up that perhaps Toyota should borrow a car from Rebellion (or someone) to do the things you're talking about if the car is not ready in time.

That would be the most sensible thing to do indeed, and would coincide nicely with Rebellion doing the rest of ALMS too.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by vyselegend

That would be the most sensible thing to do indeed, and would coincide nicely with Rebellion doing the rest of ALMS too.

Right, and Rebellion has enough cars that they could probably provide Toyota with a car or two even if they wanted to.

I know Rebellion has watches to sell so they have to pick their markets strategically, but I think the ALMS makes a lot of sense for them. If I were them, I'd call up Toyota USA and see if they can throw them a few dollars to come race in the US. Just some spare change from the NASCAR and NHRA programs. They can go up against Mazda and perhaps Honda if Cytosport goes the ARX-03a route. The Lola-Aston might be there too. That would be great and relevant competition. I think they can win too. Assuming it makes sense from the watch perspective (and plenty of other premium watch companies have sponsored the ALMS so I guess the demographics work), I would think the ALMS is a great option.

[Félix]

Good news, I can't wait to see the car and the technical solutions they'll use. In the meantime, speculation is very funny - and I guess entertaining.

A slightly different way of looking at it: TMG in Germany still plans on supplying the customer RV8KLM to Rebellion and 2 other potential (imaginary?) cars for next year, right? The powertrain for the new effort will come from Japan so there should be no conflict/overlap and limited shared benefits between the 2 programs (assuming it's a completely different turbo unit).

My questions is: what is Toyota's position going to be about what will surely be a fairly big performance difference between the 2 projects? On one hand, they're in the same class and Rebellion surely pay a few millions a year for the engine, on the other end, customer efforts should be expected to have inferior performance. Still, a very interesting dilemma - and they can't pretend the 2 engines and efforts compete in different classes...

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Félix

My questions is: what is Toyota's position going to be about what will surely be a fairly big performance difference between the 2 projects?

That is why many assume that Rebellion might move to ALMS in order to not race against the factory team all year.

[Félix]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

That is why many assume that Rebellion might move to ALMS in order to not race against the factory team all year.

Most elegant solution indeed! Might even convince me to drive to Mosport - 10 hours away, closest ALMS track for me.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Félix

My questions is: what is Toyota's position going to be about what will surely be a fairly big performance difference between the 2 projects? On one hand, they're in the same class and Rebellion surely pay a few millions a year for the engine, on the other end, customer efforts should be expected to have inferior performance. Still, a very interesting dilemma - and they can't pretend the 2 engines and efforts compete in different classes...

Well, you get what you pay for I guess. Also, Rebellion is fully aware of what the situation is I'm guessing.

This might be a silly question, but could Rebellion score manufacturer points for Toyota in the WEC?

[deggis]

By the way, here is the official PR: http://pressroom.toyota.com/releases...ampionship.htm

Nothing new really, but slightly differently emphasized, the title is "Toyota to Participate in FIA World Endurance Championship in 2012", lemans.org version said "...to participate in 2012 Le Mans 24 Hours".

...

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by AGD

This might be a silly question, but could Rebellion score manufacturer points for Toyota in the WEC?

Not with the current ILMC sporting rules, because Rebellion uses a Lola chassis.

The definition of a manufacturer is the association between the chassis constructor and the engine builder: namely, the person (people) or named entity holding the intellectual property rights to the chassis and engine whose names appear on the homologation form validated by the ACO.

If it is a question of two different manufacturers, the name of the chassis constructor must always precede that of the engine builder. The ACO homologation forms valid that day will, if necessary, be modified as a result.

source: http://www.lemans.org/wpphpFichiers/...egulations.pdf

[AGD]

Originally Posted by deggis

By the way, here is the official PR: http://pressroom.toyota.com/releases...ampionship.htm

Nothing new really, but slightly differently emphasized, the title is "Toyota to Participate in FIA World Endurance Championship in 2012", lemans.org version said "...to participate in 2012 Le Mans 24 Hours".

...

It still says the same thing about taking part in several races in 2012.

Ok, so the manufacturer title is out of the question, but could Rebellion run under the Toyota name for whatever races real Toyota will skip and go for the team/driver title? I don't know if there is any point in that given that Rebellion will struggle against Audi and Peugeot, but it could allow Toyota to compete the full 2012 WEC season without paying fines. Granted, I doubt Toyota cares about token fines and I also doubt the ACO would worry about collecting those fines.

[gwyllion]

I doubt that Toyota believes that they have any chance at winning the WEC championship (driver, team, manufacturer) in their first attempt. 2012 will be all about gaining experience...

[deggis]

Originally Posted by AGD

It still says the same thing about taking part in several races in 2012.

I realized that. I was just pointing out the difference kind of emphasis in the title. Yes, just a title, but it's a difference and welcomed difference if you think about how well known Le Mans as an event is compared to WEC right now.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I doubt that Toyota believes that they have any chance at winning the WEC championship (driver, team, manufacturer) in their first attempt. 2012 will be all about gaining experience...

Right, I doubt the championship is all that important to them in 2012. Win Le Mans and win Fuji and it will be a season to never forget. Actually, just win Le Mans and it would be a season to never forget! But I'm sure Fuji is important too.

I think the interesting story that has not been discussed is the tire situation. Whether Toyota goes with Michelin or someone else, new tires will probably have to be developed. Supposedly Michelin does not have a wide front tire that is specifically designed to be on the front and designed for petrol cars. I don't know if the hybrid will play a factor with front tire design either. It would be new for Dunlop and anyone else too. Is there enough time to do sufficient testing at this point?

[Simmi]

I doubt they will be getting fined either to be perfectly honest if they set out their stall early and admit they won't compete in all the races. 'Force majure' (sp) as others have said.

[deggis]

The fine is 30,000 € per skipped race, btw.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by AGD

Whether Toyota goes with Michelin or someone else, new tires will probably have to be developed. Supposedly Michelin does not have a wide front tire that is specifically designed to be on the front and designed for petrol cars.

I don't see the problem. Rebellion and Aston Martin ran with the wide front Michelins.

Originally Posted by AGD

I don't know if the hybrid will play a factor with front tire design either.

Unless they have a very strange weight distribution or drive the front wheels electrically, they should be fine.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I don't see the problem. Rebellion and Aston Martin ran with the wide front Michelins.

Well, what is good enough for AMR and Rebellion may not be good enough for Toyota. Maybe it will be good enough to start with. Hasn't it been rumored that the Rebellion (and AMR-One I guess) front tire situation is basically the same as it was for the ARX-02? As in the tires could use a lot more work to be a proper front tire?

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by AGD

Hasn't it been rumored that the Rebellion (and AMR-One I guess) front tire situation is basically the same as it was for the ARX-02? As in the tires could use a lot more work to be a proper front tire?

That rumor is BS. Just read the read the "A centimetre can make a big difference" article from Michelin.

Compare the specification of

• Audi R18: front tyres 36/71-18 and rear tyres 37/71-18
• AMR-One: front tyres 36/71-18 and rear tyres 37/71-18