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

[TF110]

Originally Posted by rayburn

If Toyota really wanted to win Le Mans this year, surely the better way of doing it would be to turn up at Silverstone with TWO 2013 cars, complete and ready to develop reliability and performance for the year ahead, To end up with ONE car ready at the second race immediately prior to LM suggests that they are not really serious about winning. Therefore, it begs the question, why are they involved at all?

Personally , I am glad to see them on the grid, but some strange decisions have been made.

They dont spend much so their budget is what they set their targets base. That means they developed the 2013 car for LeMans, not Silverstone (so far) and decided against running it there because of the tracks layout. They will run two cars like normal teams do. Just because its Toyota doesn't mean its a huge operation. Akio Toyoda has cut back on huge spending. Something that has allowed them to be frugal and turn a profit for last fiscal year of triple what they expected. This may be good news for the future of Toyota's motorsports. If they can get good profits and a ROI maybe 3 cars is a possibility.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Yeah, right, "I must be confused". That's the explanation. How dumb I am

I didn't call you dumb, pal Don't know where you got that. I said confused because you were certain Vasselon said "were back in the game" but that was Lapierre's enthusiasm.

[Velociraptor]

Originally Posted by Speed-King

No. In F1 all cars are built to the same formula - including the same type and size of engine. And therefore it all really comes down to the teams' engineering qualities.

Once you introduce different engine types and sizes with inherently difference performance characteristics, you have to find a balance between these different concepts. If the organizers get that wrong, somebody might do a much better job on the engineering side of things and still be caught out by the organizers incompetence or malevolence.

nobody put a gun to Toyota's head to run a petrol hybrid... also, nobody put a gun to Audi's head to run a FWD flywheel hybrid, which has shown to be less powerful than Toyota's solution. I don't see Audi making noises about BoPing the hybrid systems. And, AFAIR, they weren't calling for a BOP last season when Toyota was faster on some tracks. You either outsmart/outengineer your opponent or you lose... this BoPing nonsense from Toyota is rubbish. Either invest properly in your car or STFO.

[gregtummer]

Can't the ACO just hire an ex-driver and "confiscate" the factory cars at random times? They could hook up timing and data systems, tell the driver to go flat out and see what the car's real pace is, what the real top speed is, what the real torque is and how far they can go on fuel?

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Velociraptor

nobody put a gun to Toyota's head to run a petrol hybrid... also, nobody put a gun to Audi's head to run a FWD flywheel hybrid, which has shown to be less powerful than Toyota's solution. I don't see Audi making noises about BoPing the hybrid systems. And, AFAIR, they weren't calling for a BOP last season when Toyota was faster on some tracks. You either outsmart/outengineer your opponent or you lose... this BoPing nonsense from Toyota is rubbish. Either invest properly in your car or STFO.

Well, I think Audi has made noise about the 120kmh rule. Toyota aren't throwing 200 million dollars at this program, so that isn't investing properly? Re-read the interview. Its fathomable that the truth is being said about what these diesels are capable of. Last year they were faster but also pit much sooner relative to what the pace vs. efficiency is this season. Wouldn't you agree?

Gregtrummer I like that idea, but teams would probably object to it, and we know they need the teams (manufacturers).

[Velociraptor]

Originally Posted by TF110

Well, I think Audi has made noise about the 120kmh rule. Toyota aren't throwing 200 million dollars at this program, so that isn't investing properly? Re-read the interview. Its fathomable that the truth is being said about what these diesels are capable of. Last year they were faster but also pit much sooner relative to what the pace vs. efficiency is this season. Wouldn't you agree?

Gregtrummer I like that idea, but teams would probably object to it, and we know they need the teams (manufacturers).

I don't see Audi calling for BoP on hybrid systems after Spa even if it was obvious that #7 stayed in front of the chasing Audi by simply outaccelerating it out of every corner, due to the massive hybrid power advantage over the flywheel system of the Audi.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Velociraptor

What Toyota is trying to do here is akin to Caterham or Marussia going to Bernie/FIA asking them to slow down Ferrari, Mclaren, Red Bull...

It's done differently in F1. A team would just ask the FIA to clarify a certain rule that the said team struggles to bend as efficiently as other do, and voila.

As for the Toyota, regardless of where the balance really is, both parties are in continuous BoP 'tug of war' around ACO. Audi keeps saying that the diesel technology or the AWD technology is disadvantaged and even talk about switching to petrol power, while TMG's side claims the opposite, these 'efforts' seem to balance each other out more or less

[sssssssss]

Originally Posted by Velociraptor

nobody put a gun to Toyota's head to run a petrol hybrid... also, nobody put a gun to Audi's head to run a FWD flywheel hybrid, which has shown to be less powerful than Toyota's solution. I don't see Audi making noises about BoPing the hybrid systems. And, AFAIR, they weren't calling for a BOP last season when Toyota was faster on some tracks. You either outsmart/outengineer your opponent or you lose... this BoPing nonsense from Toyota is rubbish. Either invest properly in your car or STFO.

that's pretty much it. audi have always (at least) tried to outsmart the competition with technical solutions and, when it was the case, accepted they had the slower car - and even when they did, they still won; and that, not against a "low budget" team (for which toyota don't really have any real excuse), but against the financial might of peugeot. that was just by pure experience and efficiency, you can't pretend that just doesn't exist and expect a half-prepared project to suddenly beat a financial, experience - and, i'd say, technological as well - colossus like audi. toyota are looking for lame excuses and shortcuts instead of accepting the obvious: audi have built the better car this year. deal with it, if you can't beat them, you'll try your best next year. that's it.

[Acid09]

Financial might of Peugeot?

Audi had the bigger budget by far during the Peugeot years. Remember that most of the innovations on the second 908 were originally intended to be an update for the first 908 but Peugeot did not have the budget to do it.

They raced a car that remained aerodynamically unchanged for four years while Audi built 1 1/2 brand new cars in the same timeframe.

[sssssssss]

as far as the money the teams invest in their programs is concerned, things are pretty simple: it's not audi's fault toyota don't want to supply their own lmp program with enough resources. you could blame audi for spending too much money when a budget cap would be implemented. atm, them spending the money they spend shows nothing else but caring about their image and really wanting to win.

why didn't toyota bring the subject up last year? why don't audi whine about the FWD flywheel hybrid solution and claim to change the rules in order to make it more powerful?

again: you can't just pretend all these years in lmp1 don't count in any way experience-wise and efficiency-wise and just try to censor audi's efforts in order for your half-prepared project to keep up with them.

[Gingers4Justice]

Originally Posted by sssssssss

as far as the money the teams invest in their programs is concerned, things are pretty simple: it's not audi's fault toyota don't want to supply their own lmp program with enough resources. you could blame audi for spending too much money when a budget cap would be implemented. atm, them spending the money they spend shows nothing else but caring about their image and really wanting to win.

why didn't toyota bring the subject up last year? why don't audi whine about the FWD flywheel hybrid solution and claim to change the rules in order to make it more powerful?

again: you can't just pretend all these years in lmp1 don't count in any way experience-wise and efficiency-wise and just try to censor audi's efforts in order for your half-prepared project to keep up with them.

Audi have completely defined what "enough resources" means. It's their game. If Toyota was the only manufacturer and Rebellion started to complain, then we'd talk of Rebellion not having a big enough budget...

Why should one team get to decide how much to spend? Toyota are sending two hybrid powered cars across the globe, in a season which covers more miles on track than the Formula One season, and they're paying for 4 professional drivers full time, sometimes six.

Yes, they're in a shoe-string, but only comparatively. Their opponent is Audi and Audi has decided how much money it takes to win Le Mans, by being the "hare" in terms of money spent. Toyota have to chase that.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Acid09

They raced a car that remained aerodynamically unchanged for four years while Audi built 1 1/2 brand new cars in the same timeframe.

They actually build 2 1/2 cars over 4 years .
R10 ran last time in 2008. (old, so not counting)
R15 in 2009. (1 New car)
R15+ in 2010 (the 1/2 car)
R18 in 2011 (1 new car)

[Gingers4Justice]

Audi's budget was bigger but that was because it was battling on two fronts, and I'd guess that money was coming in from NA as well.

Audi has been the only manufacturer to race regularly both sides of the pond in the same season. Since the turn of the millennium, it's just been them, Aston and now Rebellion, surely?

Not sure what that says, but it's a point worth making.

[Mal]

I think the ACO should leave things be and wait and see what LM brings - but FWIW I think Toyota have been caught out by the level of development that Audi has achieved with the R18 and it too late to do anything about it - so the only recourse is to cry foul and hope for the best.

[Simmi]

Originally Posted by Mal

I think the ACO should leave things be and wait and see what LM brings - but FWIW I think Toyota have been caught out by the level of development that Audi has achieved with the R18 and it too late to do anything about it - so the only recourse is to cry foul and hope for the best.

I got a shouted down in some corners for suggesting it at the back end of last year but Audi took their foot off the gas on the '12 car after Le Mans and concentrated on this year. It seems that will pay dividends.

[Mal]

Originally Posted by Simmi

I got a shouted down in some corners for suggesting it at the back end of last year but Audi took their foot off the gas on the '12 car after Le Mans and concentrated on this year. It seems that will pay dividends.

Yes, because Audi had the championship in the bag and they therefore deliberately or otherwise gave Toyota a false sense of security. At the end of the day they Toyota are using an opportunity with the ACO to peg back Audi. I hope they don't succeed as I don't believe they have done enough running in the new car for the ACO to properly Judge.

[GT6]

Well the ACO have said nothing yet so lets see what they eventually say

[chernaudi]

Originally Posted by Simmi

I got a shouted down in some corners for suggesting it at the back end of last year but Audi took their foot off the gas on the '12 car after Le Mans and concentrated on this year. It seems that will pay dividends.

Mulsanne Mike has been saying this all along since June last year. It seems that Audi played a conservative fuel mileage strategy last year, but this year, they've decided to throw down the gauntlet now that they know sort of what they're dealing with--they said that doing a 180 on the fuel mileage deal is possibly worth 5 seconds alone at a track like LM. It's whatever trade off yields the most chances of success, and LM-style endurance racing does tend to favor the faster cars with the lack of full course yellows, and even if that doesn't go entirely in their favor, the speed is still a significant edge.

That, and all the work that Audi did to the R18 to improve the hybrid system, improve their tires and especially their cars' usage of its tires (Audi ran 2012 spec tires the entire weekend at Silverstone, but had no issues with double stinting and even considered a triple stint during the race) as far as grip and endurance, and using their own version of Toyota's endplate deal, it seems that the combined strategy shift and R&D work that Audi did over the winter may've caught Toyota off guard it's too late for them to make significant headway on their own for the rest of the WEC season, let alone before LM.

But again, I do question why TMC seems to be shortchaning TMG quite a few things. If Toyota as a car company was serious about this IMO, why wouldn't they be throwing everything at it like with the GT-One program?

[aneesh99]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

why wouldn't they be throwing everything at it like with the GT-One program?

Same reason the Peugeot Sport programme died, motorsport is an extra expense that isn't viewed as integral in terms of marketing strategy or whatever else it may be, especially in the face of the ongoing global financial crisis. Now, given that TMC isn't actually doing so bad, I guess TMG are finding it very difficult to extract and arm twist the head honchos in Japan for more funds. I'm not sure how true to traditional Japanese culture they are but I think it's fair to say that they funding is overly conservative.

I'm certainly not buying the crap that TMG want to do it on the cheap, I'd be willing to bet the boys at Cologne would give an arm and a leg for more budget but they have to make do with what they're given, and take it as a blessing, because it could really simple for the board to pull the rug out from under TMG's feet and leave it looking like Peugeot Sport was not so long ago.

[chernaudi]

TMC do seem to be sparing no expense for their NASCAR program compared to Ford and Chevrolet/GM. But then again, that culture is different. In the WEC, you have a factory team and maybe possibly a semi-works private team running year old cars/older spec cars that get updated to factory spec later on in the season.

In NASCAR, almost all teams are nominally semi-works private squads who bring their own cash to the show with sponsorship packages. Such as thing could help sportscar racing IMO, but there's not that many sponsors out there who want to the be the title sponsor for a factory team in a WC.

I'd almost guess that world wide that Toyota gets more ROI on their NASCAR program than anything else as far as motorsport involvement and resultant press.

[TF110]

Toyota has its NA TRD doing Nascar. And they spend there what Toyota NA is willing to spend.

TMG is different. It almost serves as its own entity. But it doesn't have huge funds. On top of it F1 teams are using their facilities. So basically its a business first, you even see them say that they schedule around those F1 teams using their tunnels rigs etc.

I might be in the minority but I think the 'development' of Audi is exaggerated by their gain in pace. I see more Audi turning up the engine and forgetting about efficiency with that being what the diesels could do if they just went for a 'Toyota' style in 2012.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

I might be in the minority but I think the 'development' of Audi is exaggerated by their gain in pace. I see more Audi turning up the engine and forgetting about efficiency with that being what the diesels could do if they just went for a 'Toyota' style in 2012.

What are you trying to say exactly ?

Audi have definitely been more aggressive in their development over the winter to extract performance out of the car, at the cost of increased fuel consumption, i.e. less fuel efficiency. They have also been able to make much better use of their tires, i.e. improve tire usage efficiency in a sense. In other words, they have been working hard to solve their 2012 weaknesses and produce a car capable to match (and exceed as it would seem) the performance of the Toyota's.

I don't quite get it when you say that such development might be "exaggerated".

Audi obviously have potential in their car, especially in their V6 TDI engine that, without any doubt, provides them with greater ability to extract additional performance from one year to the other. Are Toyota already at the limit with their engine development ? I do not know.

What I know for a fact is that Audi have opted several years ago for an audacious engine configuration with outstanding development potential and which allows them to keep up with the development pace over several years. Is that "development exaggeration" ? I do not believe so.

[Aysedasi]

Well I understood him.

I think you did too.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Well I understood him.

I think you did too.

Good to know. Thanks

[Mal]

I find it difficult to believe that Audi would have let Toyota win some of those races late last year if they could have just turned up the engine and gone faster. I would think this is all part of the development strides they have made.

I definitely think Toyota have been caught napping a little - they underestimated how much work Audi would put into it and how much progress they could make. Up until this week we have heard nothing much from Toyota about problems with the diesel equivelancy.