[LM24 Race] Le Mans 2011 - Race Week Thread - Scrutineering/Qualifying/Race

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by AGD

I'm not diminishing their win, I'm just saying that the fastest individual cars did not win. The GTE-Pro class, like last year, was a true old-fashion endurance race where a lot of the fastest cars dropped out or had other major difficulties. Although a lot of people predicted a Corvette Racing win, I think most people thought the 74 car would be the ones to bring home the bacon. They were in position to win before their crash, but their loss was the 73 car's gain obviously.

You can say whatever you want here but your poking at stick at a invalid point.
How many times have we seen bfore that the Fastest car did not win Lemans. The Audi's on numerous occasions(vs Pescarolo in 05 and vs. The peugeots in 07,08, and 10). the corvette's over the aston martins in GT1, The saleen, The Panoz in GT2 in 06, Theres so many cases where te fastest car doesnt win. Thats pretty typical at Lemans.....

[arakis]

the fastest car did win, the fastest one to complete the race distance, in every form of racing in every race the fastest car always wins.

for all interested the pdf with the race analysys is up at lemans.org, does anyone know if they will ever post all the laptimes of all the laps for all the cars,, like they do in LMS/ALMS

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

You can say whatever you want here but your poking at stick at a invalid point.
How many times have we seen bfore that the Fastest car did not win Lemans. The Audi's on numerous occasions(vs Pescarolo in 05 and vs. The peugeots in 07,08, and 10). the corvette's over the aston martins in GT1, The saleen, The Panoz in GT2 in 06, Theres so many cases where te fastest car doesnt win. Thats pretty typical at Lemans.....

No doubt, as I said, it was a true old-fashion endurance race. The 73 team are deserving winners, no doubt. I'm not sure what I said to imply that they weren't because I never meant to say that.

[Audi Racer]

I can;t help but mention that it was a very uncharacteristic race from peugeot. They didnt have the speed. what do you think was the reason for being so slow. At one point during the race Bourdais set a 3:26. Then the pace disappeared and they could only get down to the 3:29's. The fact that the peugeots were able to do 12 lap stints tells me that they did not have the engine's turned up to full blast. Do you think they turned down the engines for the race because the puegots were uncharacteristically slow. Engine reliablity?. I know they ran low downforce and that didnt help them in the 1st and 3rd sectors when it rained and when the track was cold

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by arakis

the fastest car did win, the fastest one to complete the race distance, in every form of racing in every race the fastest car always wins.

for all interested the pdf with the race analysys is up at lemans.org, does anyone know if they will ever post all the laptimes of all the laps for all the cars,, like they do in LMS/ALMS

That's not true, the fastest doesn't always win. I've seen many a race where the fastest car, either the one on pole or the one that's posted the fastest lap during the race, doesn't win.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

I can;t help but mention that it was a very uncharacteristic race from peugeot. They didnt have the speed. what do you think was the reason for being so slow. At one point during the race Bourdais set a 3:26. Then the pace disappeared and they could only get down to the 3:29's. The fact that the peugeots were able to do 12 lap stints tells me that they did not have the engine's turned up to full blast. Do you think they turned down the engines for the race because the puegots were uncharacteristically slow. Engine reliablity?. I know they ran low downforce and that didnt help them in the 1st and 3rd sectors when it rained and when the track was cold

Actually, the Peugeots seemed to run quite well during the night and early morning when the track was cool. I think they could maximize the soft tires during those stints. However, it may have just seemed that the Peugeots were faster then because that is when Fassler was driving the #2 Audi.

The differences are minute, but I think Audi may have a slightly better all around car at the moment. Obviously both have totally new cars this year so comparisons to previous years does not really mean much.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by AGD

Actually, the Peugeots seemed to run quite well during the night and early morning when the track was cool. I think they could maximize the soft tires during those stints. However, it may have just seemed that the Peugeots were faster then because that is when Fassler was driving the #2 Audi.

The differences are minute, but I think Audi may have a slightly better all around car at the moment. Obviously both have totally new cars this year so comparisons to previous years does not really mean much.

The weird thing is the peugeot was expected to struggle the most during the night time when the track was cold. They said that the car was best when there was heat in the track. They weren't getting heat into the front tires with the low downforce.

from Mulsannes Corner:

Finally we know from our source in Peugeot Sport that the 908 has a very narrow operating window. This has a lot to do with the wide fronts. As the temperature dropped the 908's all lost pace – whilst Audi just motored on. Simple: come 9 am and the Peugeots will start catching up again. That is, if there are any Audis to catch up to.

[Audi Racer]

And i think Audi surprised Peugeot Big time with the tire situation. At Spa it seemed like the Peugeot had the upper hand on tires and the Audi was beggining to be a handful on old tires. Peugeot seemed confident that they would use less tires than Audi.

But Audi pulled a fast one on Peugeot. They only quadruple stinted with even 2 five stint runs on the tires. All while lapping 3:26's and 3:27's. the Trelure and Lotterer stints were impressive in the fact that at the end of the fourth stint they were each still putting in 3:26's and 3:27's in traffic.

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

That's not true, the fastest doesn't always win. I've seen many a race where the fastest car, either the one on pole or the one that's posted the fastest lap during the race, doesn't win.

Arakis matches it
Even a supposed to be slower car can be the fastest in putting the distance behind first and win a race.
The car that puts the distance behind fastest wins it

Not making much sense I guess

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Andy77

Arakis matches it
Even a supposed to be slower car can be the fastest in putting the distance behind first and win a race.
The car that puts the distance behind fastest wins it

Not making much sense I guess

Not really.

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Not really.

Too early for logic

Another try.
A 500 hp Porsche GT (top speed 180 mph) and a 900 hp 2011 Aston Martin LMP (top speed 230 mph) meet on circuit for a 2 lap race. The Porsche GT finishes the 2 lap race in 6:05 minutes while the Aston LMP limps around course doing just a 7:11 minute 2 lap race.

So in this particular race the supposed to be slower car was the faster on circuit as it did the race in the fastest time (of the day) and rightly won the race

Guess this attempt is even worse

[arakis]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Not really.

its quite simple, the car that finishes first, has complited most race distance in the least time. in other words it is the car with the Fastest average speed over the whole race,and that is the only place you are suposed to be faster in a race.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Andy77

Too early for logic

Another try.
A 500 hp Porsche GT (top speed 180 mph) and a 900 hp 2011 Aston Martin LMP (top speed 230 mph) meet on circuit for a 2 lap race. The Porsche GT finishes the 2 lap race in 6:05 minutes while the Aston LMP limps around course doing just a 7:11 minute 2 lap race.

So in this particular race the supposed to be slower car was the faster on circuit as it did the race in the fastest time (of the day) and rightly won the race

Guess this attempt is even worse

No it's not worse, I see what your getting at.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by arakis

its quite simple, the car that finishes first, has complited most race distance in the least time. in other words it is the car with the Fastest average speed over the whole race,and that is the only place you are suposed to be faster in a race.

That still doesn't necessarily make it the fastest. The car that came second may have had an unusually long pit stop or several unscheduled pit stops, that ate into its time, which happens in a long race like Le Mans.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by arakis

its quite simple, the car that finishes first, has complited most race distance in the least time.

I don't know about that. Say you have a car on pole and a car starting 50th on a normal grid. The car that started 50th ends up losing to the pole car by a fraction of a second at the end of the race. The loser actually covered more distance.

[Dead-Eye]

Originally Posted by Andy77

Too early for logic

Another try.
A 500 hp Porsche GT (top speed 180 mph) and a 900 hp 2011 Aston Martin LMP (top speed 230 mph) meet on circuit for a 2 lap race. The Porsche GT finishes the 2 lap race in 6:05 minutes while the Aston LMP limps around course doing just a 7:11 minute 2 lap race.

So in this particular race the supposed to be slower car was the faster on circuit as it did the race in the fastest time (of the day) and rightly won the race

Guess this attempt is even worse

I guess what you're trying to say is "the fastest car over a single lap (or a certain amount of them) doesn't always finish first"

[fieldodreams79]

I thought it was an absolute brilliant race; the best Le Mans I have witnessed, even though those numbers are limited. I am still trying to recover from my attempt to stay up for the entire 24 hours. Really enjoyed the chat room and the lads (and one lass apparently) there.

Fantastic work from Audi and the #2 drivers. They did the only thing they could do to win that race two team cars down; go flat out, and the they did, even with tough "defending" from Peugeot. The two Audi accidents left me sick in the stomach, especially Rocky's. Once I found out that everyone made it relatively unscathed, I felt better, and a little at ease, but Rocky's shunt still gives me chills just thinking about it.

Awesome stuff from the Robertsons! If the LMP1 battle wasn't so intense, this would've been the story of the race for me personally.

And did anyone see that the Corvettes took the honors in both GT classes? That's right CORVETTE! Bowties, baby! Congrats to the P&M gang and Labre.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by AGD

I don't know about that. Say you have a car on pole and a car starting 50th on a normal grid. The car that started 50th ends up losing to the pole car by a fraction of a second at the end of the race. The loser actually covered more distance.

you are correct , but I guess that fraction of a second is earned in the qualifying session.

[Le Vieux]

Another tack for this thread: the discussion about fastest laps lost me about 50 posts ago.

For the first time since my first visit in the Eighties, we turned up at Arnage Corner only to be refused entry to the car park at 8.45 on Saturday morning because we didn't have a parking ticket. For over 25 years we have bought a ticket on the gate. We were told there was free access into the overflow car park half a mile down the road, but when we arrived there, were also refused entry because we had no ticket.

One of our number enquired at the pay kiosk at Arnage and was told that they had sold out of car parking tickets - even though there were precisely two cars in the overflow car park. The driver of our car went round to the ACO's main office to try and buy a ticket, only to be told that he had to buy one at Arnage.....

We drove away and again passed the overflow car park - now with three cars in it! The ACO must have lost quite a bit on parking tickets.

A separate part of our group went to Arnage for the start at 3pm and witnessed a bunch of car park tickets being handed over to the officials at the corner. He bought one - as has always been our custom - and found a place in the main car park. Upon leaving later that evening, the overflow car park was still virtually empty. At the same time the local police were being very strict about parking in the road, even though there were no "No Parking" signs out till later.

Does anyone have an explanation for this or is it just down to the ACO's sometimes chaotic organisation?

On a separate subject, I noticed that on Sunday the banking at Arnage/Indianapolis was nowhere near as crowded as normal and several of our number remarked on the lack of traffic between the ports and LM, around Arnage on Saturday morning and on our campsite some distance away which was around 25% down on last year. Were numbers fewer or was I just in the wrong place at the wrong time?

[henk4]

I hope everybody enjoyed the week in a similar pleasant way as we did and which is shown here

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/event...f-Le-Mans.html

I was particularly pleased by the camaraderie between the Audi and the Peugeot teams. They do know that they need each other to score something else than just a hollow victory. Pity that only one can win, but that is sport. I haven't read this thread but I do hope that this spirit is also reflected in the majority of the posts here. My next thing up is to clean the Le Mans dust off my car and attach the R18 sticker that Steamship Collins was kind enough to provide me with. And yes, the sticker will sit on and HDI-FAP propelled car.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by Le Vieux

Another tack for this thread: the discussion about fastest laps lost me about 50 posts ago.

For the first time since my first visit in the Eighties, we turned up at Arnage Corner only to be refused entry to the car park at 8.45 on Saturday morning because we didn't have a parking ticket. For over 25 years we have bought a ticket on the gate. We were told there was free access into the overflow car park half a mile down the road, but when we arrived there, were also refused entry because we had no ticket.

One of our number enquired at the pay kiosk at Arnage and was told that they had sold out of car parking tickets - even though there were precisely two cars in the overflow car park. The driver of our car went round to the ACO's main office to try and buy a ticket, only to be told that he had to buy one at Arnage.....

We drove away and again passed the overflow car park - now with three cars in it! The ACO must have lost quite a bit on parking tickets.

A separate part of our group went to Arnage for the start at 3pm and witnessed a bunch of car park tickets being handed over to the officials at the corner. He bought one - as has always been our custom - and found a place in the main car park. Upon leaving later that evening, the overflow car park was still virtually empty. At the same time the local police were being very strict about parking in the road, even though there were no "No Parking" signs out till later.

Does anyone have an explanation for this or is it just down to the ACO's sometimes chaotic organisation?

On a separate subject, I noticed that on Sunday the banking at Arnage/Indianapolis was nowhere near as crowded as normal and several of our number remarked on the lack of traffic between the ports and LM, around Arnage on Saturday morning and on our campsite some distance away which was around 25% down on last year. Were numbers fewer or was I just in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Attendance was just over 249,000, up from 238,000 last year. I heard from someone who watched the race from the Porsche Curves that the crowd looked bigger this year, so probably your second point.

[djb]

Le vieux...that must have been bloody frustrating. What a cock-up.

[tux]

I was thinking, there seems to be alot of frustration that Aston Martin got 2 entrys which lasted no more than 6 laps. But ask yourself this, did Oak racing need 4 entrys? Did Felbermayr need 3?....

Lotus Evora looks amazing from behind, kind of Lister stormesque.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by tux

I was thinking, there seems to be alot of frustration that Aston Martin got 2 entrys which lasted no more than 6 laps. But ask yourself this, did Oak racing need 4 entrys? Did Felbermayr need 3?....

Lotus Evora looks amazing from behind, kind of Lister stormesque.

Did OAK need 4 entries? Perhaps not. Did Felbermayr need 3 entries? Perhaps not. But Felbermayr were the defending champions and Jacques Nicholet did good deeds over the offseason.

But they certainly deserved it more than AMR. The difference was Felbermayr, and OAK did more than 12 laps at the Le Mans test day, actually had entries that showed up at Sebring and Spa and inevitably managed to complete more than six laps during the race.

In fact, all but one of the OAK cars managed to outqualify the AMR One, including the LMP2 car and all amatuer LMP1 car. The ACO should have seen this coming, and had their chance to scratch them after Spa. People were moaning and complaining about the Norma being a field filler, but that actually managed to complete more than 200 laps, and as an LMP2 car was only less than a second slower than one of the AMR Ones in qualifying.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by FordCosworthPanoz

Did OAK need 4 entries? Perhaps not. Did Felbermayr need 3 entries? Perhaps not. But Felbermayr were the defending champions and Jacques Nicholet did good deeds over the offseason.

But they certainly deserved it more than AMR. The difference was Felbermayr, and OAK did more than 12 laps at the Le Mans test day, actually had entries that showed up at Sebring and Spa and inevitably managed to complete more than six laps during the race.

In fact, all but one of the OAK cars managed to outqualify the AMR One, including the LMP2 car and all amatuer LMP1 car. The ACO should have seen this coming, and had their chance to scratch them after Spa. People were moaning and complaining about the Norma being a field filler, but that actually managed to complete more than 200 laps, and as an LMP2 car was only less than a second slower than one of the AMR Ones in qualifying.

i am glad ACO let AMR race, so they can emabaress the neme of AM some more, now they will either get it trough their skulls that you cant built LMPs on the cheap and sifon more money into it, or abandon this still dead child that is AMR-One to its well deserved grave. I mean if you cant even built a proper GTE car, that with 50kg less and 1.4mm more restrictors cant win, what chance does it have at lmp1

*sorry for the disgusting graphics