|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
1 Dec 2012, 21:53 (Ref:3173982) | #2626 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,203
|
That's just a branding exercise. There's nothing special about 'Ultra technology' in motorsport terms. Perhaps R18 and TS030 have achieved more at miking their cars lighter, but it's not about ground-braking know-how and inventions, but rather development.
|
||
|
1 Dec 2012, 22:07 (Ref:3173985) | #2627 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6,654
|
Quote:
Some consider the One piece Monocoque and Carbon Gearbox Housing for ground-braking for Endurance cars. |
|||
__________________
Hvil i Fred Allan. (Rest in Peace Allan) |
1 Dec 2012, 22:30 (Ref:3173991) | #2628 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 781
|
I have a question about the fuel flow meter. I'm not well-versed in the technical side at all, but I was wondering:
1. Does the fuel flow meter sort of negate the freedom in engine size? As in, wouldn't it be an advantage to run a smaller engine? 2. What the hell do they mean when they say the fuel flow meter will take "race strategy" out?! Why would that ever be anyone's goal?! Thanks. |
|
|
2 Dec 2012, 00:02 (Ref:3174014) | #2629 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,203
|
With all due respect, I see that more as a question of development budget, rather than know how. And it would have been called ultra regardless of those things. Just like R8 LMS. It's similar to Mazda's 'Skyactiv technology' which is just an branding term for various little efforts to improve efficiency.
|
||
|
2 Dec 2012, 02:47 (Ref:3174031) | #2630 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,434
|
My point here is exactly that, that Audi can spend the money to build things lighter than other constructors. Ausid can afford some trial and error, and can devote many more engineers (and more supercomputer time) to a project than, say, Onroak, or more than Honda might choose to, or more than Wirth can convince Honda to fund.
It the design and development edge which sets factory teams apart---the smaller, less-wealthy teams learn during the season what the rich teams learned via simulation and testing before finalizing their designs. So maybe some of the other teams considering P1 chassis are finding it hard to build to the lower limit while still including an ERS option. I don't know, but I don't think I am the only one in this thread trying to make reasonable guesses. |
|
|
2 Dec 2012, 05:52 (Ref:3174074) | #2631 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,569
|
Some ERS systems weigh around 50kg. The cars without ballast are probably lighter than 800kg. If there's a problem it's probably just the weight balance with an ERS system installed. The Peugeot 905 weighed 750kg, that was in 1993! There's no doubt in my mind these cars that will be slimmer could meet 830kg. This rule has to have a reason, but I wonder what the specifics are.
|
|
|
2 Dec 2012, 13:19 (Ref:3174187) | #2632 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 6,232
|
Don't take it out of the context: "...in order to avoid any race strategy or fuel economy run and this kind of thing we could see in the past".
|
|
|
2 Dec 2012, 18:10 (Ref:3174248) | #2633 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 781
|
The context does nothing to change the meaning to me, which is why I was asking what it meant. It sounds like they want to get rid of fuel strategy. I think that's a horrible idea, personally. I hope I'm just being dense and missing the meaning. Why take out a factor that can help another car overcome certain weaknesses and make for a compelling race?
|
|
|
2 Dec 2012, 18:13 (Ref:3174249) | #2634 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
2 Dec 2012, 20:21 (Ref:3174287) | #2635 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,203
|
Basically they don't want to have engines that can make 1000 hp in qualifying 'mode' that would have to be completely strangled towards the end of the race to go the distance without running out of allocated fuel.
As a limitation it's not much different from having current restrictors, strategy-wise. |
||
|
2 Dec 2012, 21:38 (Ref:3174305) | #2636 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 495
|
What is the chance of a P1 team turning up on the grid in 2014 with an F1 engine in the back of their car? It is likely that the works teams will not use them, so will privateers be likely to use the Pure engines for example?
|
|
__________________
"How would you like a newspaper upside your head?" @MattMK45 |
2 Dec 2012, 23:32 (Ref:3174365) | #2637 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 10
|
The Pure effort to build an F1 engine is already over. Canceled due to lack of finance.
|
||
|
3 Dec 2012, 17:19 (Ref:3174663) | #2638 | |
Racer
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 495
|
Oh right, I heard that it was put on hold, but I guess it is not very surprising that they could not find the funds needed. Thanks for the info . It seems like it will be very unlikely then.
|
|
__________________
"How would you like a newspaper upside your head?" @MattMK45 |
3 Dec 2012, 21:50 (Ref:3174748) | #2639 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Andrew Cotton reveals an interesting fact about the 2014 minimum weight in the January 2013 issue of RCE:
Quote:
|
||
|
3 Dec 2012, 22:53 (Ref:3174781) | #2640 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,124
|
As mentioned PURE is gone. I see no reason Ferrari, Mercedes or Renault would want to be distracted by trying to support both F1 and sports prototypes at the same time.
I believe that Cosworth only supplied two F1 teams (HRT and Marussia) this year. HRT is apparently a zombie and not expected to participate next year. That leaves only one team potentially using Cosworth in 2013, so there is speculation that Cosworth will not build F1 engines for 2013/14 and that one of the other suppliers (Renault?) would supply engines to Marussia. However, apparently Cosworth has put some work put into a 2014 spec engine. I wonder if Cosworth could switch to sports prototype engines for 2014? Could they make money by providing a good privateer engine or would they have the same funding issue as Judd? Richard |
|
|
4 Dec 2012, 05:33 (Ref:3174864) | #2641 | |||
Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 79
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
4 Dec 2012, 09:45 (Ref:3174922) | #2642 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,569
|
700kg for non hybrids would've been great. Audi voted against it of all the people you would expect.
|
|
|
19 Dec 2012, 22:59 (Ref:3180189) | #2643 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,738
|
Audi confirms that they are working on a new car for 2014.
Quote:
|
||
|
23 Dec 2012, 02:28 (Ref:3181259) | #2644 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,569
|
http://www.worldcarfans.com/11212195...r-than-le-mans
Quote:
|
||
|
23 Dec 2012, 02:30 (Ref:3181261) | #2645 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,299
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
23 Dec 2012, 03:26 (Ref:3181265) | #2646 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
Quote:
Still, it the 2014 rules for Formula One are scrapped, that means they'll remain as the fastest cars in the world. |
||
|
23 Dec 2012, 05:02 (Ref:3181276) | #2647 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 15,569
|
Theyre around 8 seconds per lap faster than lmp1 now. If lmp1 gets faster in 2014 and the f1 cars were slowed down by that much, they could well have been outpaced or at least a close match.
|
|
|
23 Dec 2012, 07:11 (Ref:3181284) | #2648 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
Slowest F1 cars of 2012 can be outpaced by 2007-2010-spec LMP1 cars on the right tracks and under the right conditions anyway.
|
||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
23 Dec 2012, 08:01 (Ref:3181293) | #2649 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,396
|
It might be an off-topic but I'm afraid that there would be a time where they would propose a "one chassis tub" for all forms of motorsport: from Formula One to Le Mans, and even IndyCar.
|
|
|
23 Dec 2012, 08:23 (Ref:3181297) | #2650 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,270
|
Highly unlikely, since LMP cars still have to be theoretical two-seaters and 2014 LMP1 regulations are just for closed cars.
|
||
__________________
When in doubt? C4. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[WEC] Glickenhaus Hypercar | Akrapovic | ACO Regulated Series | 1603 | 12 Apr 2024 21:24 |
[WEC] Aston Martin Hypercar Discussion | deggis | ACO Regulated Series | 175 | 23 Feb 2020 03:37 |
[WEC] SCG 007: Glickenhaus Le Mans LMP1 Hypercar | Bentley03 | ACO Regulated Series | 26 | 16 Nov 2018 02:35 |
ALMS Extends LMP Regulations | tblincoe | North American Racing | 33 | 26 Aug 2005 15:03 |
[LM24] Whats the future of LMP's at Le Mans?? | Garrett | 24 Heures du Mans | 59 | 8 Jul 2004 15:15 |