LMP1 Performance Balance

[JAG]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

According to Claude Galopin of Pescarolo Sport diesels produce 1600 Nm torque compared to 700 Nm for petrol engines! They also have 100 bhp extra. 20 bhp accounts for 1 sec in Le Mans, so the Audi and Peugeot get 5 sec just because of the extra power.

source: http://www.pitlane-vision.com/index....tte&Itemid=119

Even if you take that as gospel you also need to consider the relative age and devlopment of the Judd compared to a state of the art turbo engine with direct injection, and of all the extra development that goes into a factory motor.

As it stands Judd, AER, Zytek etc. may well have quit development on their current engines, instead focusing on their P2 motors in preperation for 2011.

[GTfour]

2011.... I seriously dread the day.

Who,b.t.w.,have conjured up this ludicrous new set of techrules?(the names of these near demented sods I mean)

[Spyderman]

Don't worry!
As always,they will change.

[scoff]

I'm getting confused. I know Torque and HP, but what does what one do compared to the other? I can imagine you have a certain power output on the wheels (hp or torque) but what's the difference (on the wheels)?

[Dunlop Corner]

Power is the change in kinetic energy per time. Torque is the change in angular momentum per time.
Now let w (should be an omega) be the rotational speed. Angular momentum is linear in w, while kinetic energy goes as w squared. This means that for low w (low revs), it is harder to build angular momentum than kinetic energy, therefor torque is more important. For higher revs, kinetic energy is far harder to build than angular momentum, so therefor you need power.

At least that is how i think it works.

[gwyllion]

ACO to continue drive for equalisation

[Spyderman]

"ACO general manager Remy Brouard believes this year's race will be much more closely fought, with engine restrictions and an extra 30kg restricting the diesels."

He has got to be kidding!

[gwyllion]

I don't see what is wrong with that statement. You must be confusing "more close" with "equal".

[HORNDAWG]

I would agree, it seems a right statement!





L.P.

[Spyderman]

No, no confusion.
"Close" to me does not mean more than 5 second/lap difference, but I can see why you wouldn't find anything wrong with the statement.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

No, no confusion.
"Close" to me does not mean more than 5 second/lap difference, but I can see why you wouldn't find anything wrong with the statement.

I guess it's all relative! It could be closer than last year, but still not "close" in your definition.

[cdsvg]

IMHO, if we assume the qualifying times we saw on thursday were all indicative of each car's ultimate pace, then I genuinely believe right now the ACO have the diesel-petrol balance spot on. Though for all we know the R15 and 908 may have been capable of much faster times, in which case there would probably still need to be changes.

[Félix]

I suspect the R15s will be able to match or even beat their quali pace (they were refining their race setup and still testing their new car) while no petrol car will get under 3.30 during the race. Close enough??

[deggis]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

According to Claude Galopin of Pescarolo Sport diesels produce 1600 Nm torque compared to 700 Nm for petrol engines! They also have 100 bhp extra. 20 bhp accounts for 1 sec in Le Mans, so the Audi and Peugeot get 5 sec just because of the extra power.

source: http://www.pitlane-vision.com/index....tte&Itemid=119

After Le Mans, I wonder if Henri becomes a bit more vocal about this...

[prototype]

Originally Posted by Félix

I suspect the R15s will be able to match or even beat their quali pace (they were refining their race setup and still testing their new car) while no petrol car will get under 3.30 during the race. Close enough??

I disagree. The Audi's may be able to match the qualifying time of the #2 and the #3 in the race, but the #1 got a clear lap on fresh tires with no excess fuel = 3:23. They wont be close to that during the race.

I agree with your point on the Petrols. But I think maybe a 3:29 from an Aston and the Pesca.

Bottom Line: Diesels are still too fast.

[joeb]

Well after nearly 14 hours into LeMans, I would say the new regs have effectively slowed the diesels. Yes the Audi and Peugeot teams are way faster, but the Kolles cars are right in the midst of the petrols. So it almost seems that the best teams and drivers and budgets are going to be at the top, but if you have private petrols and diesels then there is a bit more equality.

Also another late night mid-race thought, have the new aero and extra 30kg on the diesels made them a bit hard to handle?

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by joeb

Well after nearly 14 hours into LeMans, I would say the new regs have effectively slowed the diesels. Yes the Audi and Peugeot teams are way faster, but the Kolles cars are right in the midst of the petrols. So it almost seems that the best teams and drivers and budgets are going to be at the top, but if you have private petrols and diesels then there is a bit more equality.

I tend to disagree, I suspect the difference is still roughly 1.1-2.0s a lap judging by comparing the laptimes appropriately. So perhaps a 10 to 20kg break for the petrols for the remainer of LMS, but I don't know if the Astons have any room to loose weight.

[JAG]

Martin Birrani of Lola said the Aston Martin DI engine had much more power then the older motor in the Speedy Lola Aston Martin, so I'm wondering how much power Judd, Zytek and AER could gain with a DI engine, whether that be with their current motor's or 2011 spec.

It's difficult to pin it down but once again the coupes appear to have a distinct advantage over a stint. In LMS events the Pescarolo, Oreca and Zytek are right up with the Lola Aston Martin's, but at Le Mans they were nowhere to be seen.

Same goes for Peugeot vs Audi, even with a new car Audi couldn't match Peugeot's pace.

IMO anyone going the open car route is now putting themselves at a distinct disadvantage at Le Mans, which just so happens to be the most important race of them all.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by JAG

Martin Birrani of Lola said the Aston Martin DI engine had much more power then the older motor in the Speedy Lola Aston Martin, so I'm wondering how much power Judd, Zytek and AER could gain with a DI engine, whether that be with their current motor's or 2011 spec.

It's difficult to pin it down but once again the coupes appear to have a distinct advantage over a stint. In LMS events the Pescarolo, Oreca and Zytek are right up with the Lola Aston Martin's, but at Le Mans they were nowhere to be seen.

Same goes for Peugeot vs Audi, even with a new car Audi couldn't match Peugeot's pace.

IMO anyone going the open car route is now putting themselves at a distinct disadvantage at Le Mans, which just so happens to be the most important race of them all.

Think that could be part of the truth. On the other hand it could also partly be that at Le Mans the power of the V12 was more beneficial than on most LMS tracks where the better weight distribution of the smaller engined petrol LMP1's was more beneficial. I don't know about the hp difference between the Peugeot and the Audi, but also here the better weight distribution of the Audi isn't as important on Le Mans as on the LMS tracks.

Thinking about it, not only would competing in LMS likely have helped their Le Mans performance, but Audi would've probably been more competitive on those tracks as well.

[prototype]

Now that Peugeot has won Le Mans, perhaps we will see a complete equalization of the rules. It would be great to see the Petrols right at the front with the diesels.

[broadrun96]

This race makes it tough for the ACO now. The AMRs were fast, second faster top-end correct? The AMR GT1 block remains eligible for next year though?? That makes balancing the rest of the petrol with the diesels at LM (does the ACO worry about other tracks, including their own series?) at tough task, but at they gave the Pugs their win. Might have to cut some displacement or boost to cut the top end back, not like they could cut much in the way of revs from an engine that hits what 40 a min? Does anybody get bigger than the 5.5 Judd in LMP1s for a petrol or will it be a Pug/Audi/AMR battle for while for LM?

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

Think that could be part of the truth. On the other hand it could also partly be that at Le Mans the power of the V12 was more beneficial than on most LMS tracks where the better weight distribution of the smaller engined petrol LMP1's was more beneficial. I don't know about the hp difference between the Peugeot and the Audi, but also here the better weight distribution of the Audi isn't as important on Le Mans as on the LMS tracks.

Thinking about it, not only would competing in LMS likely have helped their Le Mans performance, but Audi would've probably been more competitive on those tracks as well.

That design also shows Audis desire to shake those ALMS cars from bugging them. Unfortunately a street course car isn't a great car for LM, hence Acura not taking that trip across to LM yet if they ever do.