[WEC] BoP. Brilliant or Pants.

[veeten]

Actually, it's better to have this hashed out now than to be in the middle of it by '26-'27, and have it really blow up in everyone's face. Remember you have new cars, teams, and manufacturers showing up in the next few months/years. Better to have a series, or two, running to stable rules for the long run than to be squabbling over territorial demands that help no one. Ran down that road since the 60's and it hasn't helped anyone.
Give it time, and let them sort this out, (all three organizations, as this will involve IMSA eventually) so that the convergence that was started in'21 will bear fruit in the form of great racing for everyone.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by J Jay

It's only controversial because the ACO gave the impression they wouldn't BoP hypercar in this way. Even when a gift horse is given to them, leave it to the ACO to look it in its mouth.

As for the manufacturers, as much as they wouldn't dare admit it, this is what they signed up for. Toyota have the right to feel aggrieved, but if they in Peugeot's position, they would be banging on the ACO's door just as hard to be given a leg up.

Okay, but realistically they should have ate it and done this since before Spa. Their way of dealing with it is idiotic.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Ft.Depl. Speed (kph in DRY)

Ft.Depl. Speed (kph in WET)

Can anyone remember when Toyota was increased? Was it it in one step from 120kph? I think the Peugeot has always been at 150kph? The Ferrari always at 190kph.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by J Jay

It's only controversial because the ACO gave the impression they wouldn't BoP hypercar in this way. Even when a gift horse is given to them, leave it to the ACO to look it in its mouth.

As for the manufacturers, as much as they wouldn't dare admit it, this is what they signed up for. Toyota have the right to feel aggrieved, but if they in Peugeot's position, they would be banging on the ACO's door just as hard to be given a leg up.

I think they went beyond an impression - they flat out said that the thing that couldn't be changed (which had just changed after it couldn't be changed) definitely wouldn't be changed. And then it was changed. After it was changed.

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by RL17

So the cynic in me may say its just to help certain French cars look not so bad in qualifying but after the swings and roundabout effect have very little impact over 24 and a bit hours.

Sorry, but I dont see you as a cynic. Just realistic. Prepare yourself to watch a Peugeot festival during one hour of race or so, if ever its possible, then retire for stickers or mosquito issues and escape the post race scrutineering. Its good for Toyota to have so called opponents because it means nothing to have only the #7 against the # 8 battle on the track. At the end of the day, they must win or seppuku! Toyoda san will be on the track.


And bear in mind that we all are lucky here to express any opinion about BoP -and other important things- because all the teams, drivers, mechanics and cooks are no more allowed to. Its in the text. I wonder what Porsche had in mind at Spa tho…
May be next step will be to change the BoP during the race remotely…

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Can anyone remember when Toyota was increased? Was it it in one step from 120kph? I think the Peugeot has always been at 150kph? The Ferrari always at 190kph.

Found it. It was in the technical bulletins last year too - I just forgot.

Ft.Depl. Speed (kph in DRY)

-- Bulletin --	--- Track ---	TOYOTA	PEUGEOT	FERRARI
2021	Bahrain	120
3/4/2022	Sebring	190
27/4/2022	Spa	190
1/6/2022	Le Mans	190
9/6/2022	Le Mans	190
10/6/2022	Le Mans	190
5/7/2022	Monza	190	150
3/9/2022	Fuji	190	150
6/9/2022	Fuji	190	150
4/11/2022	Bahrain	190	150
8/3/2023	Sebring	190	150	190
8/3/2023	Portimao	190	150	190
31/5/2023	Le Mans	190	150	190
		GR010 Hybrid	---- 9X8 ----	--- 499P ----

The wet activation speed for Toyota was 140 to 160 in 2021, but I can't find what it was at each race.

Ft.Depl. Speed (kph in WET)

-- Bulletin --	--- Track ---	TOYOTA	PEUGEOT	FERRARI
2021	Bahrain	140-160
3/4/2022	Sebring	190
27/4/2022	Spa	190
1/6/2022	Le Mans	190
9/6/2022	Le Mans	190
10/6/2022	Le Mans	190
5/7/2022	Monza	190	150
3/9/2022	Fuji	190	150
6/9/2022	Fuji	190	150
4/11/2022	Bahrain	190	150
8/3/2023	Sebring	190	150	190
8/3/2023	Portimao	190	150	190
31/5/2023	Le Mans	190	150	190
		GR010 Hybrid	---- 9X8 ----	--- 499P ----

Tedious table I know. As there aren't many changes. It is just really when new cars come in.

[tomcug]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Can anyone remember when Toyota was increased? Was it it in one step from 120kph? I think the Peugeot has always been at 150kph? The Ferrari always at 190kph.

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...d-for-sebring/
Seems it happened in 1 step before Sebring 2022.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Gerard C

And bear in mind that we all are lucky here to express any opinion about BoP -and other important things- because all the teams, drivers, mechanics and cooks are no more allowed to. Its in the text.

I'm curious about this - what text.

I know that they've been asked not to - do it in the right way not in the press. But is it actually in the rules?

Not least because you do see stuff. Not least from Glickenhaus and last couple of days from Kobayashi (not massive theatrics) - although he says it is worth 1.2s per lap.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by tomcug

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...d-for-sebring/
Seems it happened in 1 step before Sebring 2022.

Thank you.

[tomcug]

Originally Posted by Adam43

But is it actually in the rules?

Took some time to find and the answer is yes.

Manufacturers, Competitors, drivers and any persons or entities associated with their entries must not seek to influence the establishment of the BoP or comment on the results, in particular through public statements, the media and social networks.

Source:
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...7.12.2022_.pdf
Page 39 of pdf file (or 27 according to numbering in footer).

[Adam43]

What impact will these changes have?

Now this is comedy analysis!

1. I have used this "fact" from Kobayashi who says 36kg is 1.2 seconds lap time impact. I have assumed he means Le Mans.
2. I have used the relative pace of the top 50 laps at Spa. Same method as in the Unified thread (without the IMSA/WEC unified bit, hence the Porsche and Cadillac are slightly different!).
2b. Vanwall may look a little worse than they are because they didn't get that many fast laps in.
3. The impact of the circuit is not considered

This table shows the relative pace at Spa to the fastest car (which was Ferrari), the weight change in the recent BoP changes, the theoretical lap time impact, and assuming a 210s lap the impact to the relative pace. So lots of leaps of faith here:

Manufacturer	Relative pace Spa	kg change	LM lap impact (s)	New relative pace
Ferrari	100%	+24	0.8	100%
Toyota	100.21%	+37	1.2	100.41%
Cadillac	100.76%	+11	0.4	100.56%
Porsche	101.40%	+3	0.1	101.06%
Peugeot	101.70%	0	0	101.32%
Glickenhaus	102.05%	0	0	101.66%
Vanwall	104.01%	0	0	103.62%

Takeaways:
1. There is no change in order
2. Ferrari pull away from Toyota!
3. Caddy gets closer to Toyota
4. Total spread reduces
5. This isn't a silver bullet for Peugeot or the smaller manufacturers

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by tomcug

Took some time to find and the answer is yes.

Source:
https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...7.12.2022_.pdf
Page 39 of pdf file (or 27 according to numbering in footer).

Thank you.

I interpret that as don't be an arse about it!

And the consequence:

Any infringement to the above principles will be penalised by the Stewards, at any time during any Competition, post-race included.

If this was meant to be applied to the extreme then Glickenhaus seems to have got away with this then.

[tomcug]

Nice analysis Adam However I wonder how accurate is that "1.2 s" statement from Kobayashi and different circuit will play its part too. We'll know more after test day.

Originally Posted by Adam43

I interpret that about don't be an arse about it!

As usually, it's debatable what they meant exactly by that.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by tomcug

Nice analysis Adam However I wonder how accurate is that "1.2 s" statement from Kobayashi and different circuit will play its part too. We'll know more after test day.

I haven't a clue. I think it is implied it is LM, but who knows. Whatever it can only be a vague guideline of 1/30th second per kg. It doesn't feel outrageous.

[RL17]

Why does relative pace increase for the slower cars(or it lap times that result in figures over 100%?) please

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by RL17

Why does relative pace increase for the slower cars(or it lap times that result in figures over 100%?) please

It is pace relative to the fastest car. So if the fastest car is slowed then the slower cars will be relatively closer.

Say Vanwall is currently has a lap time 4% slower than Ferrari. If you slow Ferrari by 0.8s around Le Mans that means Vanwall will be only 3.6% slower.

Here it seems Ferrari is the fastest even after the change (it’s Top 50 laps were better than Toyota at Spa!)

I could have converted to a Le Mans type lap time, but left it as a % just because Spa was the start point. I might do that later as I think it might demonstrate it better - thanks

[Adam43]

Based on RL17 feedback. Instead of expressing the relative pace as a %, it is expressed as difference in lap time at Le Mans. Assuming a 210s nominal lap time.

Manufacturer	Relative pace (s)	kg change	New relative pace (s)
Ferrari	0	+24	0
Toyota	+0.4	+37	+0.9
Cadillac	+1.6	+11	+1.2
Porsche	+2.9	+3	+2.2
Peugeot	+3.6	0	+2.8
Glickenhaus	+4.3	0	+3.5
Vanwall	+8.4	0	+7.6

Still lots of assumptions and ultimately it is a simple model, but it doesn't look completely stupid. Remember this is based on Top 50 lap time performance. My guess on this is that Toyota will do better in Q - if only because they will manage their tyres better. Also I would expect Vanwall to be closer to Glickenhaus - the start point of this is Spa and they didn't have that many laps to get the best Top 50 they could have. So should do better if they get, say 100 laps at Le Mans.

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Matador

Okay, but realistically they should have ate it and done this since before Spa. Their way of dealing with it is idiotic.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I think they went beyond an impression - they flat out said that the thing that couldn't be changed (which had just changed after it couldn't be changed) definitely wouldn't be changed. And then it was changed. After it was changed.

I agree - the ACO have handled this poorly and gone back on their word. But this won't be the first, or last, time a certain French race organiser will bow to the almighty factory dollar.

[Adam43]

It is confusing, I thought they were bowing to Toyota’s yen, now it is, er, Peugeot’s euro? Or is it Ferrari’s. Or Caddy’s dollar.
Ultimately the biggest winners are also Glickenhaus and Vanwall. It is Glickenhaus that has been most vocal (despite the rules saying they couldn’t be) - did they win?
Porsche, the most successful manufacturer going into year 100, gets a big bump too. Almost as good as the others, but they are closer already. Subtle to hide the real intent?

I can’t work out what the narrative is with why this is corrupt. Other than we could have a narrative whatever the change was.

[Bentley03]

I think this deserves no real analysis, other than to confirm that this evens things up and should enhance 'the show' for the centenary race, when the eyes of the world are focused on Le Mans. It is an opportunity too good to miss, so they threw everything they'd previously said out of the window.

In the end, it's all about 'the show', and the money that it generates.

[Mal]

I have been listening to Graham Goodwin on TWISC over the last few weeks explaining it is a set of performance parmeters within a window - such as max drag, downforce etc and it is up to the manufacturer to get as close as possible to that maximum without breaching it - this he explained was why Glickenhaus and Vanwall were struggling to maximise their package - due to resource limitations.

How then does this change fit that model? Does it mean that some teams have breached it and are being held back?

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Adam43

It is confusing, I thought they were bowing to Toyota’s yen, now it is, er, Peugeot’s euro? Or is it Ferrari’s. Or Caddy’s dollar.
Ultimately the biggest winners are also Glickenhaus and Vanwall. It is Glickenhaus that has been most vocal (despite the rules saying they couldn’t be) - did they win?
Porsche, the most successful manufacturer going into year 100, gets a big bump too. Almost as good as the others, but they are closer already. Subtle to hide the real intent?

I can’t work out what the narrative is with why this is corrupt. Other than we could have a narrative whatever the change was.

It isn't corruption, I'm not making that allegation. The ACO have a history of wanting to keep manufacturers on-side (and therefore on board). This BoP adjustment helps everyone apart from Toyota. The only criticism from my view is that they've gone back on their word, even if it was inevitable.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by J Jay

It isn't corruption, I'm not making that allegation. The ACO have a history of wanting to keep manufacturers on-side (and therefore on board). This BoP adjustment helps everyone apart from Toyota. The only criticism from my view is that they've gone back on their word, even if it was inevitable.

I think this is absolutely right. It was foolish for the ACO to say what they did and extremely embarrassing/annoying (depending on your take on it) for them to go back on their decision. The fact that they've done this comes as absolutely no surprise to me - I would have expected it, to be honest. The fact that they were stated that they wouldn't is the really stupid thing.

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by Mal

How then does this change fit that model? Does it mean that some teams have breached it and are being held back?

It means some teams can't maximise their potential so the others are being held back for the sake of the show. Those are the rules of the game.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by J Jay

It isn't corruption, I'm not making that allegation. The ACO have a history of wanting to keep manufacturers on-side (and therefore on board). This BoP adjustment helps everyone apart from Toyota.

A strong word, I grant you, but in the ball park of what is being suggested (not specifically by you). My main point is that not too long ago the rationale was that
Toyota was being favored. Now it is the opposite. So I think we can park that it is to favor whoever.

It is just to tweak the competition. The narrative that it is to favor a manufacturer doesn’t seem to fly.

It would be great to see the driver of the change in the data, but that probably wouldn’t help the general perception. And could ruin the process.

The only criticism from my view is that they've gone back on their word, even if it was inevitable.

Yes. It’s odd. They said and explained otherwise.

I was always surprised Le Mans wasn’t going to have a change, but that’s what they said. Two reason I thought there potentially should be. Firstly, it is a different style track. Secondly, it’s about at the time when they’ve just collected a decent chunk of data from previous races and the new cars.

Ultimately the teams and drivers still have to be good in the areas promoted by these new rules. Consistency, ease of use, adapting to different conditions and reliability. All very endurance racing.

And these changes look like they are just narrowing the field rather than changing the current pecking order.

This change is not odd in a way and fits with what should happen, but it is odd because they were firm that we wouldn’t get a change. The only thing they said could happen is Hypercar v. LMDh adjustment and even that was ruled out around Spa time. Now we have much more than that.