LMP2 engine changes? (merged)

JAG · 13 Jun 2006, 23:40 (Ref:1633916)

Just watched an interview with Daniel Poissenot (sp) of the ACO and he was hinting there could be some changes to LMP2 engine specs to improve reliabilty for privateers.

He talked about possibly reducing power slighlty and introducing 'series line' engines.

I presusme by this he means 'production' based engines, possibly GT2 type spec, 500bhp?

Wonder how an RSR engines stacks up against a Judd or AER, price wise?

**skycafe** · 14 Jun 2006, 00:42 (Ref:1633946)

Just read basically the same thing on DSC. I am sure he doesn't want a Porsche RSR in the mix since everyone is now up in arms about the Porsche's in ALMS. I think intead looking for others from Japan or Europe, but I wonder how much capacity you have to give a 'stock block' to compete against the race engines? Unless you give them capacity and hold back on restrictors you are going to have some very expensive engines or gernades-or both.

robert

MulsanneMike · 14 Jun 2006, 01:08 (Ref:1633957)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAG

Just watched an interview with Daniel Poissenot (sp) of the ACO and he was hinting there could be some changes to LMP2 engine specs to improve reliabilty for privateers.

I'm a little confused about the reasoning...to improve reliability? Wasn't aware there was a reliability issue with LMP2 engines. Now I know there is an issue with the power-to-weight ratio LMP1 vs. LMP2....

775kgs @ 550 hp = 1.409 kgs/hp

vs.

925 kgs @ 650 hp = 1.42 kgs/hp

Is that the ACO's way of describing the above? LMP2s need more reliability?

JAG · 14 Jun 2006, 15:59 (Ref:1634407)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

I'm a little confused about the reasoning...to improve reliability? Wasn't aware there was a reliability issue with LMP2 engines. Now I know there is an issue with the power-to-weight ratio LMP1 vs. LMP2....

775kgs @ 550 hp = 1.409 kgs/hp

vs.

925 kgs @ 650 hp = 1.42 kgs/hp

Is that the ACO's way of describing the above? LMP2s need more reliability?

He distinctly said the chassis are fine, reliability wise, the problems are with the engines (maybe he meant the whole engine/gearbox package and the stresses being put on them?).

He went onto talk about the 'series line' engines being introduced.

I'm guessing they'll increase weight to 800kg, reduce power to 500bhp (current Judds, AER etc.) and encourage off the shelf production based engines from GT2.

Who knows, they may even follow Grand Am and homologate individual engines so the likes of the Panoz V8 could be used, bypassing the current 4l limit for GT2 engines.

I cannot emphasise enough how he insisted LMP2 was for privateers, leaving the big boys to LMP1. When asked about the Penske RS Spyder, he replied it would be better to see privateer versions at Le Mans.

Fogelhund · 14 Jun 2006, 01:21 (Ref:1633961)

A couple of thoughts.

Are homologated engines a weight penalty over their pure racing counterparts? Perhaps this is partially a methodology to allow an interested party into the mix???

Add weight to all of the cars, then the Homologated engine has a place.

I am also confused about the engine reliability issue. It really is the other parts, which perhaps may have been slightly compromised by needing to get down to weight. Perhaps an increase in weight will allow for the build of more "sturdy" parts, in addition to addressing the LMP1 vs. LMP2 power to weight issue.

MulsanneMike · 14 Jun 2006, 01:36 (Ref:1633965)

From what I've heard, there is a weight increase coming for LMP2. That would jive much better if homologated engine are being considered as they have a considerable weight disadvantage over purpose built racing engines. Sounds like Daniel Poissenot is prepping everyone for the weight increase. Just wish they wouldn't skirt around the issue...

Tim Northcutt · 16 Jun 2006, 17:13 (Ref:1635947)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MulsanneMike

From what I've heard, there is a weight increase coming for LMP2. That would jive much better if homologated engine are being considered as they have a considerable weight disadvantage over purpose built racing engines. Sounds like Daniel Poissenot is prepping everyone for the weight increase. Just wish they wouldn't skirt around the issue...

This makes perfect sense, especially when melded with your power vs. weight comparisons, Mike....

and it might allow others to run a homologated engine at a lower cost than a purpose-built race engine, yet still be competitive....

However, if what ss-collins states is true...that LMP2 would become a "Formula Stock Block" class, then I think the ACO will be sending a bad message to Honda/Acura and to Porsche...

I hope that Mike and Jag are correct in this...that the weight goes up to make a homologated production-based engine more competitive, but still allow the purpose-built race engines to compete.....this would make the most sense....

JAG · 16 Jun 2006, 17:27 (Ref:1635954)

On the Motors TV interview, Poissenot (sp) talked about reducing the power of the current engine as well as introducing stockblock motors, not replacing one for the other.

dj choc ice · 16 Jun 2006, 20:54 (Ref:1636040)

thanks for the news JAG, i thought they were going to swap the race engines for the stock block engine, but stock block engines would not be able to be put into the cars because of size now would they?
i mean the limit for engine size in LMP2 is 2.0 turbo or 3.4 V8 N/A and the stocj block GT2 engines all exceed that figure bar the gillet vertigo alfa romeo V6 i think, not unless these rules come in and the ACO raise the maximum size for stock block engine

ger80 · 14 Jun 2006, 10:20 (Ref:1634182)

If you take this

Quote:

775kgs @ 550 hp = 1.409 kgs/hp

vs.

925 kgs @ 650 hp = 1.42 kgs/hp

and calculate the power divided by the max. engine size:

550hp/3400 ccm = 0,16hp/ccm
650hp/6000 ccm = 0,10hp/ccm

you see that a LMP2 engine has more power per ccm. So its more a racing engine and thats makes them less reliability. Of couse most LMP1 engines are smaller in reality.
Think 800kg and 450hp with an mim. weight for the engine and an standard space which must be in every chassis to enable them for different engines would be good.
Thats why the Porsche is so fast, the chassis is build completly for one engine. Others like Lola and Courage have to be more flexibel and can not optimize there chassis in the same way. Look the back of the Porsche chassis ....

paul-collins · 14 Jun 2006, 12:50 (Ref:1634281)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ger80

If you ... calculate the power divided by the max. engine size you see that a LMP2 engine has more power per ccm. So its more a racing engine and thats makes them less reliability.

Less reliability - the proof is in the pudding, so they say. How many LMP2 engine failures have we seen in the last year? I can't think of any...

Fogelhund · 14 Jun 2006, 13:03 (Ref:1634293)

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul-collins

Less reliability - the proof is in the pudding, so they say. How many LMP2 engine failures have we seen in the last year? I can't think of any...

I'll give you a hint. Zoom Zoom.

tux · 14 Jun 2006, 14:26 (Ref:1634356)

mazda?

Supercar · 17 Jun 2006, 01:28 (Ref:1636113)

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul-collins

Less reliability - the proof is in the pudding, so they say. How many LMP2 engine failures have we seen in the last year? I can't think of any...

Intersport AER at Le Mans 2005, fire at Road America, blown engines in test sessions, other broken powertrain components. Last year's LMP2 Le Mans was ridiculous. RML came back after about 10 pitstop repairs to win it. They were lucky that their failures were not race-ending, as it was for many of their other classmates. The competition was basically reduced to who fixes their broken stuff first.

LMP2's have the highest power/weight and power/displacement ratios. Was this an oversight, miscalculation? With the exception of Porsche they are all privateers.

gwyllion · 19 Jun 2006, 08:28 (Ref:1637018)

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul-collins

Less reliability - the proof is in the pudding, so they say. How many LMP2 engine failures have we seen in the last year? I can't think of any...

Maybe it is time to look at the LMP2 battle field of this weekend. Nothing but engine and gearbox problems/failures.

Rollcentre: engine overheated and clutch changed (the LMP1 spec Ricardo gearbox ran fine)
Binnie: lots of starter problems
RML: brakes changed, ignition coil and spark plugs changed
Miracle: spark plugs changed
Intersport: waste gate changed, ignition coil and spark plugs changed, turbo changed
G-Force: 3 hours lost to find crank shaft sensor failure, a bit later withdrawal because of broken gearbox
PBM #36: stranded on track because of transmission problems
PBM #37: crash
Chamberlain Synergy: spark plugs replaced multiple times, another electronical problems (engine sensors), withdrawal because of broken gearbox

None of the LMP2 cars had a trouble free run.

Fogelhund · 19 Jun 2006, 12:03 (Ref:1637157)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Maybe it is time to look at the LMP2 battle field of this weekend. Nothing but engine and gearbox problems/failures.

None of the LMP2 cars had a trouble free run.

Sure, plenty of cars had problems this year, and LMP2 still gets beat across the head with a stick.

How about some realities then?

LMP1 4/12 classified - 33% finishing rate
LMP2 6/12 classified - 50% finishing rate
GT1 7/12 classified - 58% finishing rate
GT2 5/14 classified - 36% finishing rate

Interesting stuff.

So maybe the ACO should look at changing the rules so that LMP1 and GT2 can become more reliable. They really seem to be the classes that have the most problems.

gwyllion · 19 Jun 2006, 12:41 (Ref:1637176)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

How about some realities then?

LMP1 4/12 classified - 33% finishing rate
LMP2 6/12 classified - 50% finishing rate
GT1 7/12 classified - 58% finishing rate
GT2 5/14 classified - 36% finishing rate

But 3 of the 6 LMP2 cars that made it to the finish are at the bottom of the list, below the GT2 cars. That is not where they should be. This just means they spend more effort keeping the car running. There is a huge discrepancy between qualifying performance and race results.

The reliabilty of GT1 should be an example for all the other classes. The Saleen made it to the finish and even the Lamborghini ran for almost 22 hours (nobody was expecting this).

Tim Northcutt · 14 Jun 2006, 11:09 (Ref:1634204)

Hmmmm....

Question:

How many teams or builders thus far have explored the option of running a GT2 homologated normally aspirated engine up to 4.0 L that is currently allowed within the LMP2 regs????

Answer:

Zero

I agree with all who have said that there will probably be a weight increase, but this "stock block" bit will see the same number of teams or builders participating in it as the GT2 engine option did....

**FIRE** · 15 Jun 2006, 14:38 (Ref:1635095)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Northcutt

Hmmmm....

Question:

How many teams or builders thus far have explored the option of running a GT2 homologated normally aspirated engine up to 4.0 L that is currently allowed within the LMP2 regs????

Answer:

Zero

Is it because of in modern LMPs the engine is part of a load bearing structure and GT engines are less suited for such installation?

Erki · 14 Jun 2006, 14:34 (Ref:1634365)

Intersport's AER at Road America?

Fogelhund · 14 Jun 2006, 14:38 (Ref:1634367)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erki

Intersport's AER at Road America?

Gearbox Failure, causing a fire. Not an engine failure.

zac510 · 15 Jun 2006, 12:38 (Ref:1635021)

Any comments from the ACO on changes to the wheel/tyre differences too?

Garrett · 15 Jun 2006, 22:01 (Ref:1635519)

The-Paddock.net are reporting that Daniel Poissenot is not happy with the reliability of the LMP2 machines. He hinted to Motors TV that some changes could take place for P1 and P2 becuse of this.

Then, it has been talked about on Radio Le Mans that LMP1 will become an all closed top proto class (GTP)!!!!!!!

I wonder if Mr. Poissenot has the idea of getting rid of P2 and having P1 protos only. This could also tie in with P1 becoming an all GTP category, meaings that the future P1 cars would only be closed top while the exitisting open top protos (i.e Audi R10) would be called P2?

Example: LMP1= Closed top cars (Maybe the future Peugeot 908)
LMP2= Open top cars (Audi R10, Pesca C60h, etc.)

What are your thoughts???

**Adam43** · 15 Jun 2006, 22:21 (Ref:1635528)

LMP2 threads merged
The closed LMP1 point is brought up elsewhere too.

ss_collins · 15 Jun 2006, 22:54 (Ref:1635542)

No as I understand it LMP2 is mooted to become a stock block Formula, P1 largely unchanged but bio diesel, and hybrid fully regulated

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lmp2	gttouring	Sportscar & GT Racing	16	23 Jun 2005 14:36
Question about lmp2	arakis	Sportscar & GT Racing	2	17 Jun 2005 15:01
RML: LMP2 place to be!	vandijk	Sportscar & GT Racing	14	28 Nov 2004 07:24
New Luchini LMP2, including new Cv0 LMP2 (merged threads)	veeten	Sportscar & GT Racing	66	3 Sep 2004 05:27
A closed LMP2?	bf1	Sportscar & GT Racing	12	7 Jun 2004 13:20