What is Aston Martin up to? - Page 102

watchingmewatchingyou · 25 Apr 2011, 15:20 (Ref:2869580)

Hello all,

I've been reading this thread with interest and would just like to add my 2-pence worth...

The comparison to the R8C is reasonably valid - certainly in terms of development before competitive racing. However, the task that AMR is facing is a bit larger. RTN were given the engine/gearbox/rear suspension directly from the R8R project (which was pretty well developed by that point anyway) and asked to come up with a coupe in very little time - this they did but unfortunately it ended in tears; the flying door in pre-q is well documented and the manual gearbox (they didn't have time to implement the semi-auto as seen in the R8R) effectively ended their race at Le Mans.

AMR have embarked on a massive project, not the "plug and play" option taken by many others currently on the grid (Audi and Pug excepted), and I for one take my hat off to that. A new chassis is a challenge - an new engine as well is an even bigger challenge.

.... and lest anyone forgets... the R8C was the first stepping stone to the EXP Speed 8 and eventually the victorious Speed 8 (albeight without any factory Audi entries that year

)

Give them time, it'll come good...

gttouring · 25 Apr 2011, 15:24 (Ref:2869581)

Any press here is good. They are simply needing good pace and reliability in the race, it will spearead a new engine option for production, very cool. If they finish great, top ten wonderful, podium unbelievable I think this is what is realistic. I am rooting for AM it should be really good racing. If it doesn't break lol

AndyN · 25 Apr 2011, 15:32 (Ref:2869587)

I think in aviation you are advised not to design a new airframe and engine at the same time.

I am sure it happens though, in aviation and motorsport, and I will be suitably appraised of several successful examples of each.....

gttouring · 25 Apr 2011, 15:32 (Ref:2869588)

Well the chassis my be new but evry thing running is known. The engine might be a new design whiich is showing problems...thanks t o muslsanne mike for his work we see what's up.
I don't think they are otherwise being so revolutionary

BRG · 25 Apr 2011, 17:35 (Ref:2869638)

CMK said
"The other thing that gets me is that if they knew they had this issue and planned upgrades, why did they bring 2 cars to test day knowing they had a fatal flaw? I would have thought time and money would be best spent at home."

I assume they had to run at the test day to be eligible for the race

Victor_RO · 25 Apr 2011, 17:42 (Ref:2869642)

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRG

I assume they had to run at the test day to be eligible for the race

Not necessarily. Highcroft didn't run at the test day, Quifel didn't run, Strakka didn't run, and at least Quifel and Strakka will be at Le Mans itself without a doubt. You only really need to run if you have rookie drivers who need to put in their requisite 10 laps.

reef1234 · 25 Apr 2011, 17:57 (Ref:2869647)

By going to the test they have been able to see an issue that may have not presented itself if they had only tested at a normal circuit. Very easy to make judgement from armchair!!!

courageous · 25 Apr 2011, 18:04 (Ref:2869651)

New-New cars (as opposed to the Acura & Zytek which are up/down/sideways-graded) had to run at least 1 model at the test.

They ILMC is a full season deal, so anyone entered in that will also have to show up at Spa or run the risk of getting booted out of the 24

JAG · 25 Apr 2011, 18:18 (Ref:2869659)

DP

templer · 25 Apr 2011, 18:32 (Ref:2869667)

I can only agree with Mike. What AMR is doing at the moment is hard to understand. They should quit the next races and try to develop the car properly on test tracks. Trying to do this during race weekends have never worked.
Though the car is also more than strange. I have discussioned the layout with a famous F1 and Group C experienced designer during another project and he tell me that nobody understand why they have chosen a open top car. Also the internal details and engine layout are strange. He think that this car will never work. Let's hope for AMR that he is wrong, but I don't think so

MulsanneMike · 25 Apr 2011, 20:14 (Ref:2869725)

Quote:

Originally Posted by templer

I can only agree with Mike. What AMR is doing at the moment is hard to understand. They should quit the next races and try to develop the car properly on test tracks. Trying to do this during race weekends have never worked.
Though the car is also more than strange. I have discussioned the layout with a famous F1 and Group C experienced designer during another project and he tell me that nobody understand why they have chosen a open top car. Also the internal details and engine layout are strange. He think that this car will never work. Let's hope for AMR that he is wrong, but I don't think so

Yes, the open top route is puzzling. And they've maximized the car's internal volume, such that they can't even place the turbo intake low if they wanted to. Frankly, I think they drew the car without any knowledge of what engine would go in it and thus made it with maximum internal area possible. Though that doesn't answer why the open top.

Ultimo · 25 Apr 2011, 20:23 (Ref:2869730)

Why the I6 Mike? Is it a clean sheet design, or is it related to anything?

templer · 26 Apr 2011, 05:04 (Ref:2869835)

I have read an interesting article about the car's Le Castellet debut in a german magazine. There's is mentioned that Prodrive chose the R6 concept because the small width of the engine create for possible space for the aero of the car. I have my doubts if this is such an improvement compared to the disadvantages of such an engine like higher vibrations and the non-stressed installation which required a subframe.
It is also speculated that AMR opted for the open top route simply for money reasons. They don't have to develop doors and wipers and such things and save so money.
Also interesting that an engineer is mentioned that followed the cars performance at Paul Ricard and noticed that the car moves up and down for a too long time after passing a curb. " This problem can not be simply solved by damper adjustments" Much room for speculations

Dani Filth · 26 Apr 2011, 12:02 (Ref:2869969)

from what i knew .. an inline6 in theory is actually extremely equilibrated .. what's their implementation in practice .. we dont know

Tom908V12 · 26 Apr 2011, 14:35 (Ref:2870044)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewF31

Paul Ricard is not a possibility? They did miss the LMS test I think. Probably because the car was not ready yet.

I highly doubt that Richards and the AMR boys wanted this to happen. They must be quite embarrassed to choke on themselves at Le Mans. Last year Audi also had a very bad start to the year and we're really looking quite humbled at Le Mans until Peugeot tripped over themselves.
So, although AMR doesn't have a budget as high as Audi, I do hope we'll see these problems solved. I'll hold my thoughts until after Spa.

Spa is at the end of next week...AMR WILL NEVER have enough time to correct anything

gwyllion · 26 Apr 2011, 15:27 (Ref:2870063)

Finally some good news from the AMR camp: http://www.fernandezracing.com/index...id=117&lang=en

Quote:

2011 Races Confirmed

Aston Martin Racing has confirmed the initial schedule of events for Adrian Fernandez and the #009 Lowe’s AMR-One. Fernandez will make his 2011 debut in the 1000km of Spa-Francorchamps on May 7, followed by the prestigious 24 Hours of Le Mans on June 11, the American Le Mans Series Monterey presented by Patron at Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca on September 17 and the Petit Le Mans at Road Atlanta on October 1.

lemansfan · 26 Apr 2011, 15:53 (Ref:2870082)

What AMR shows at the Test Day was a Desaster . They are 24 sec slower than the Pole . For me the hideous LMP since a long Time !!!

**PascaLM** · 26 Apr 2011, 16:02 (Ref:2870087)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemansfan

What AMR shows at the Test Day was a Desaster . They are 24 sec slower than the Pole . For me the hideous LMP since a long Time !!!

I think that some of you think the AMR is ugly because its shape is revolutionary
and it looks unusual.
I like this attempt of AMR to build something completely different.

templer · 26 Apr 2011, 16:34 (Ref:2870108)

Quote:

Originally Posted by PascaLM

I think that some of you think the AMR is ugly because its shape is revolutionary
and it looks unusual.
I like this attempt of AMR to build something completely different.

I agree with you that AMR is trying something different. I have had the hope that they would built something different and revolutionary to go the pace of Audi and Peugeot, but that car is unusual but definitely not revolutionary. They tried to follow Audi's lead with the airflow partly guided trough the car. The more straightlined duct is okay and better than the complex Audi R15 way but the duct blow into the engine bay. There are many structures ( subframe, exhaust, turbo and so on) which causes trubulences and so I think they will loose their effect on towards the exit at the rear. And I also don't understand the splitted cooling ducts and the diffusor air management. A strange way for me. And I don't think that this car has impressed any rival race car engineer.

For me it is the wrong aero layout ( open top) and the wrong engine layout. Perhaps they will manage to get the car running a step better but I fear taht the distance to the Peugeot 908 and the Audi R18 will be larger than it was with the Lola based coupe

NightStalk3r · 26 Apr 2011, 17:35 (Ref:2870126)

Quote:

Originally Posted by PascaLM

I think that some of you think the AMR is ugly because its shape is revolutionary
and it looks unusual.
I like this attempt of AMR to build something completely different.

Whats revelutionary about it? its just a box with a snow plough on the front that thinks its a shark.

TheNewBob · 26 Apr 2011, 17:52 (Ref:2870134)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NightStalk3r

Whats revelutionary about it? its just a box with a snow plough on the front that thinks its a shark.

Well, I've never seen a snow-plough-box-shark go racing before... and AMR are proving why!

Number7 · 26 Apr 2011, 18:13 (Ref:2870142)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemansfan

What AMR shows at the Test Day was a Desaster . They are 24 sec slower than the Pole . For me the hideous LMP since a long Time !!!

Lister had a prototpe that was almost as slow. 2006 or 2007?

lemansfan · 26 Apr 2011, 18:13 (Ref:2870143)

http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/2506/yq8xue4g_jpg

I was shocked when I see the AMR the first Time on Sunday .

JAG · 26 Apr 2011, 18:25 (Ref:2870152)

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemansfan

What AMR shows at the Test Day was a Desaster . They are 24 sec slower than the Pole . For me the hideous LMP since a long Time !!!

No one really knows how quick the car is, they did 3.51 after a handful of cautious laps, a clean, meanigful run is needed.

**joeb** · 26 Apr 2011, 18:44 (Ref:2870169)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom908V12

Spa is at the end of next week...AMR WILL NEVER have enough time to correct anything

I was wondering the same thing. Can they get the new engine pieces installed and ready for Spa?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Favourite Aston Martin?	TimD	Classic Cars	38	16 Feb 2008 14:08
David Ellis' Aston Martin GT700	Kid Prozac	Sportscar & GT Racing	2	18 Apr 2002 22:08
Aston Martin	Speedworx	Sportscar & GT Racing	3	22 Nov 2001 22:52
Aston Martin meeting June 24th	TimD	Trackside	8	25 Jun 2000 21:40