Audi LMP1 Discussion

[chernaudi]

Don't you also mean like MotoGP bikes and things like that which also use cassette type gearbox/differential cluster removal?

The R8's Ricardo gearbox and the R10/R15/R18 series XTrac gearboxes are nothing special internally, as the guts are basically a 5 or 6 speed version of a NASCAR Jerico "dog" box:

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Don't you also mean like MotoGP bikes and things like that which also use cassette type gearbox/differential cluster removal?

The R8's Ricardo gearbox and the R10/R15/R18 series XTrac gearboxes are nothing special internally, as the guts are basically a 5 or 6 speed version of a NASCAR Jerico "dog" box:

That too. I know many people were really impressed at the speed in which the R8 rear sections could be changed, but, it was so simple. 8 bolts, a few hydraulic quick disconnects and wham. Done.

[chernaudi]

Not to mention that Oreca did much the same (changed the whole rear of the car) with one of their Dallaras at LM in '02 with no special tools or any thing like that. They also had an off the shelf XTrac gearbox in that car. And Oreca managed that in about 5 minutes.

[ederss7]

In 2001 the winning R8 also changed the rear end, didn't it? And then they won after changing the turbocharger in 2014.

[MoMedic9019]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Not to mention that Oreca did much the same (changed the whole rear of the car) with one of their Dallaras at LM in '02 with no special tools or any thing like that. They also had an off the shelf XTrac gearbox in that car. And Oreca managed that in about 5 minutes.

They did. It really was nothing special, but, alas, lives on as a legendary part of Audi's LM history. Swapping whole gearboxes back then was the norm, but, it sometimes took longer than it could have. Even a WRC team can get it done in less than 15-20.

[bhtooefr]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

They were designing, if not, testing, a new gasoline engine possibly to have been used in a future LMP1 car if they (Audi Sport and Audi board) thought it was worth continuing. Audi were considering the switch back to gasoline because, even without dieselgate, future NA and EU emissions and fuel economy regs will become increasingly unfavorable to diesels in road car applications, and would increasingly favor hybrids with relatively small forced induction gasoline engines. Hence, marketing the TDI engines beyond a few years for new road car applications would be redundant.

It's worth noting, by the way, that emissions regulations are causing the downsize-and-turbocharge model to backfire on automakers: http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN12E11K

The European fuel economy and emissions test cycles are getting more realistic (and much stricter), thanks to pressure from environmental groups. This means that downsize-and-turbocharge's fuel economy benefits are disappearing - under real-world loads, downsized gasoline engines simply don't work that well.

The same environmental groups are also pressuring European regulators to remove the legal cheating in their test cycles. (In fact, Volkswagen's US market (and, as it turned out, worldwide) cheating was found as a result of a study sponsored by one of those environmental groups, who was trying to prove that cost-effective diesel compliance was possible in Europe, by using the US cars as an example. They weren't expecting the US cars to be cheating...)

And, particulate number standards are starting to be rolled out in Europe, making it even harder for direct injection, especially turbocharged, gasoline engines to meet emissions. This means that there'll be more unreliable emissions hardware on these road cars.

Now, while it appears that diesel emissions controls aren't cost effective in normal cars, I suspect that downsize and turbocharge will be seen as similarly not cost effective soon. And, it's worth noting that one of the most efficient production gasoline engines, at 40% thermal efficiency, is a port injected, naturally aspirated motor with only intake VVT (but heavy EGR).

As far as saving LMP1-H, I've posted this idea elsewhere, so I'll post it here... take a page from Formula E's book, and combine the DPi formula (which eliminates chassis and aero development costs for the manufacturers, both of which are bottomless pits of money with no production relevance) with a spec battery and a powertrain claim rule. That way, manufacturers are focusing on engines, motors, inverters, and transmissions (the road-relevant technology that they can market), but at the same time, a privateer can easily get in (much like Techeetah buying Renault powertrains in Formula E), and the cost capping is very effective - exceed the cap, your powertrain is getting bought by a competitor.

I think Peugeot's campaign for an LMP675-esque class with no hybrid technology is the wrong way to go, and even goes against Peugeot's own road car hybridization and electrification strategy... at which point, why not just pull an Alpine, and sponsor someone's existing LMP2?

[knighty]

like I said before, you reap what you sow.....I quote the Autocar article:

"Audi was heavily involved in the manipulation of diesel engine emissions through the use of cheat software at the Volkswagen Group"

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/vw-emissions-scandal-audi-engine-boss-stefan-knirsch-quits

Therefore its only right that Audi takes the fall for it......looks like the VW WRC team are next for the chop......its going to get worse before it gets any better

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by knighty

like I said before, you reap what you sow.....I quote the Autocar article:

"Audi was heavily involved in the manipulation of diesel engine emissions through the use of cheat software at the Volkswagen Group"

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/in...-knirsch-quits

Therefore its only right that Audi takes the fall for it......looks like the VW WRC team are next for the chop......its going to get worse before it gets any better

Feels more like the fans and innocent team members are taking the fall for a decision made by a manager of a road car company.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Not to mention that Oreca did much the same (changed the whole rear of the car) with one of their Dallaras at LM in '02 with no special tools or any thing like that. They also had an off the shelf XTrac gearbox in that car. And Oreca managed that in about 5 minutes.

To be fair, the reason ORECA managed that was because Dallara learnt from building the R8R and R8s for Audi and built it into the Dallara SP1, which came after the Audis. So whilst others managed it, they did it after Audi and the initial cars capable of it were built using lessons learned from designing Audis.

[chernaudi]

I don't like the idea of a powertrain claiming rule or spec hybrids. That's not going to do anything for carmakers who want to develop tech for the future. I like the idea of open hybrid powertrains and engine specs, but balanced by a MJ limit on hybrids and air restrictors for engines.

Basically, 8MJ isn't realistic for road cars, and is excessive for race cars. 4MJ for racing is more reasonable. Also, Audi and some other companies (I know that Lamborghini were using such a system) used a FI system that combined port injection and DFI, and could use either one or both for certain situations. That's road relevant and could be use successful in racing.

And if one read's some of Hindy's comments on Midweek Motorsports FB page, it wasn't diesel gate that killed the LMP1 program. It was a lot more political than that between Audi Sport and the ACO. The current and near future ACO regs painted Audi into a box where even if they went with a gasoline engine, their optimal solution wasn't that different from what Porsche and Toyota were doing as to make it relevant or interesting enough to continue. So why not do something else for a while until the rules get opened up one way or another?

Believe me, the ACO might reap what they've sown on this one, by ticking off and alienating other car makers who'd have happily joined in if the costs were more reasonable and there was more than one way to do things being allowed to be equal to the "one popular" way, at least on paper.

[Starfish Primer]

Will VW get the same treatment in the WRC? This would leave Porsche as the only high profile motorsport program in the VW group.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/mo...ampaign=buffer

[TF110]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

I don't like the idea of a powertrain claiming rule or spec hybrids. That's not going to do anything for carmakers who want to develop tech for the future. I like the idea of open hybrid powertrains and engine specs, but balanced by a MJ limit on hybrids and air restrictors for engines.

Basically, 8MJ isn't realistic for road cars, and is excessive for race cars. 4MJ for racing is more reasonable. Also, Audi and some other companies (I know that Lamborghini were using such a system) used a FI system that combined port injection and DFI, and could use either one or both for certain situations. That's road relevant and could be use successful in racing.

And if one read's some of Hindy's comments on Midweek Motorsports FB page, it wasn't diesel gate that killed the LMP1 program. It was a lot more political than that between Audi Sport and the ACO. The current and near future ACO regs painted Audi into a box where even if they went with a gasoline engine, their optimal solution wasn't that different from what Porsche and Toyota were doing as to make it relevant or interesting enough to continue. So why not do something else for a while until the rules get opened up one way or another?

Believe me, the ACO might reap what they've sown on this one, by ticking off and alienating other car makers who'd have happily joined in if the costs were more reasonable and there was more than one way to do things being allowed to be equal to the "one popular" way, at least on paper.

Why is 8mj excessive for race cars? That makes no sense. They have free energy under braking to recuperate. Toyota manages 8mj just fine with only two kers. It's not like they have to use an ers-h type system to make the 8mj class. The rules are there to rely less on fuel and more on electrical power. Abandoning that would be going backwards. The lightweight thing could work because less weight to move around means better fuel efficiency. That's the ruleset's purpose.

I saw that vw wrc story earlier and thought it would be brought up here. Porsche may be the only factory VAG program left aside from dtm. They're not pulling out because of the similarities of the cars, neither is Audi. That's an excuse to cover their own faults in the dieselgate.

[chernaudi]

"Going backwards" might be the only way to make the series appealing to car makers who don't wanna spend 100 million plus USD on a program where they get less press than a back of the field F1 team would get on the same budget.

Or at least do what the intent of the rules seemed to be pre-ERS incentive, and give multiple concepts a realistic chance to succeed on track. The ERS incentive is what's jacked up the cost to run in LMP1, as well as the fuel flow meters. Not to mention that the ERS incentive has placed the emphasis on performance, not fuel economy. Besides, Toyota aren't getting the same fuel mileage as Porsche are, having to pit 2 laps earlier at Fuji per stint, for example.

I think that the ACO, as often since 2009, have acted in a knee jerk manner and have alienated a fair number of car makers and private teams who otherwise might have committed to the series. Rebellion are gone, Audi are going to be gone, and if things don't pick up, Porsche and Toyota will be looking at ROI on their ends, too.

[CTD]

I'm sorry for being a bit direct, but this constant budget bickering is driving me crazy.

1. To the admins, would it make sense to have a dedicated thread for this subject in a similar way we have regulation discussion?

2. ACO have no influence on the budgets chosen by the current three manufactures. This is all decided by those who are willing to be participating. We all have a pretty good feeling that the regulations are even written to suit all threes wishes of more hybrid technology, leaving ACO with less fault in this matter.

3. Wanting the ACO to controll the budget is more politics than sport. It's Big government vs. small government. There are benefits and drawbacks to both, but what is always the same is the "peoples" ability to claim the current rule to be the reason why things are going worse. Had ACO implemented cost control, limited the hybrid to make the series cheaper, then I am 100% sure we wouldn't see Audi or Toyota in the WEC.

4. As already correctly stated, all things comes and goes this spring, we hailed the racing and competitiveness as being some of the greatest of all time. Now it is all about moaning how the ACO have messed up in regard to the regulation.

5. Running a Le Mans project is not simply a matter of Marketing, this we know for a fact now, it is also a matter of R&D. Let's not forget that many of the greatest inventions in human history didn't come by researching specifically for it, but by reaching for different goals and finding it on the way. Le Mans regulations gives manufactures a package which cannot be found anywhere else, especially not in F1, so that comparison I find to be invalid.

There is a good saying: "It's better to have one bird in the hand, than two in the bush". It is easy and free for manufactures to come out and say "oh, if only things were like this and this, we would participate". Please remember when reading these stories that the ones saying this, are gaining free PR for comments which are costfree as these people are not the ones approving the final budget anyways. ACO played safe, chose to satisfy their current participants and have managed to keep Audi onboard for almost two decades, which I find impressive.

[chernaudi]

Sadly, I don't feel this way with the post 2013 regs. I think that the ACO rushed, and didn't play it safe. They IMO excessively gave incentive to huge hybrid systems, and in the wrong way. Why do people buy hybrid cars? The same reason people buy diesels, and buy four cylinder econoboxes, not for performance, but because they're either cheap or will save them money at the gas pump.

Hybrids in LMP1 aren't saving fuel, not in the way that they are on the road in real life. Yes, they're burning less fuel than just a few years ago, but hybrids are being used mostly for sheer performance. Under the 2011-13 regs, it has to be remembered that drivers had no direct say in how they deployed their hybrid systems--it was more or less automated to keep them from deploying the ERS energy as a type of "DRS" or "push to pass" system. Which is exactly how they hybrids have been often used under the 2014 to present regs, especially since drivers now have a lot more say in deployment.

I had skepticism and worries about rising costs and teams technologically being painted into a box. And sadly, it seems that my fears are coming true. Yeah, the cars are still fast and interesting, but the variety is slowly but surely being choked out in favor of one primary way that's best, one solution that everyone is gravitating towards and making their own version of. And the same has happened in F1 and taken away from a lot of the excitement, and has been happening for years, since the FIA has specified a preferred engine formula from 1997 onwards.

I personally find it disappointing that we're losing variety in terms of engine configurations and sizes, different sizes and methods of ERS recovery, and different ways of doing things. And IMO, that's almost as much a turn off for car makers as the cost of racing is.

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by Starfish Primer

Will VW get the same treatment in the WRC? This would leave Porsche as the only high profile motorsport program in the VW group.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/mo...ampaign=buffer

Audi still have their DTM program as well (reduced to six cars next year - but that's the same as the other manufacturers in the championship).

[bobec]

Originally Posted by BertMk2

Audi still have their DTM program as well (reduced to six cars next year - but that's the same as the other manufacturers in the championship).

They can watch their own DTM races, I'm not that interested. If VW leaves WRC, I'm boycotting VW/Audi and their racing programs (if any).

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by bobec

They can watch their own DTM races, I'm not that interested. If VW leaves WRC, I'm boycotting VW/Audi and their racing programs (if any).

VW have left the WRC.

[bobec]

Originally Posted by Mike E

VW have left the WRC.

Officially?

[gert]

Originally Posted by bobec

Officially?

Autosport report they have, yes

http://www.autosport.com/news/report...ull-out-of-wrc

[YorkshireLad]

It's all over Twitter now... This is snowballing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bobec]

Originally Posted by gert

Autosport report they have, yes

http://www.autosport.com/news/report...ull-out-of-wrc

Very possibly, but there's no official confirmation yet. There is still hope (maybe)

[bhtooefr]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Basically, 8MJ isn't realistic for road cars, and is excessive for race cars. 4MJ for racing is more reasonable.

Considering the power handling capability of an energy storage device that's only expected to last the one race? Eh.

Let's assume 275 km/h for each major braking event, let's assume 950 kg with driver, and let's assume that there's no power limit, and 40% of energy can be recovered at each braking event (that's how much a Prius can recover typically, for our road car relevance). Also, let's assume 100 km/h target speed at the end of a braking event. This means that you're getting about 1 MJ at each major braking event, of which there's five (first Mulsanne Chicane, second Mulsanne Chicane, Mulsanne Corner, Indianapolis, Porsche Curves). That's 5 MJ, and that's ignoring every other corner that requires braking, which is probably another couple MJ easily.

Also, 1 MJ is 0.2777... kWh. Not that much energy storage required, and that's the highest energy regenerative braking events.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by bobec

Very possibly, but there's no official confirmation yet. There is still hope (maybe)

The first paragraph of the Autosport article says: ''Autosport's sources have confirmed the decision was taken at a board meeting in VW headquarters in Wolfsburg on Tuesday morning."

True, VW have made no official comment but this all sounds official enough to me. So that's VAG out of the WEC and WRC.

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

True, VW have made no official comment but this all sounds official enough to me. So that's VAG out of the WEC and WRC.

VAG still represented in WRC by Skoda - the Fabia R5 runs in WRC2 (and very competitively). Currently no suggestion that the Skoda programme is binned.