[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[gwyllion]

The numbers in appendix B have also changed from draft 4 to 5.

• The fuel tank size has been increased by 1.9%: 1.2 liter for petrol and 1 liter for diesel.
• The fuel allocation was increased by around 1.8%.
  
  For petrol:
  

  hybrid	draft 4	draft 5
  0 MJ	148 MJ/lap	150.5 MJ/lap	+2.5 (+1.7%)
  2 MJ	143.5 MJ/lap	146.0 MJ/lap	+2.5 (+1.7%)
  4 MJ	139.0 MJ/lap	141.5 MJ/lap	+2.5 (+1.8%)
  6 MJ	134.5 MJ/lap	137.0 MJ/lap	+2.5 (+1.9%)
  8 MJ	132.2 MJ/lap	134.7 MJ/lap	+2.5 (+1.9%)

  For diesel:
  

  hybrid	draft 4	draft 5
  0 MJ	140.3 MJ/lap	142.7 MJ/lap	+2.4 (+1.7%)
  2 MJ	138.4 MJ/lap	140.8 MJ/lap	+2.4 (+1.7%)
  4 MJ	134.0 MJ/lap	136.5 MJ/lap	+2.5 (+1.9%)
  6 MJ	129.7 MJ/lap	132.1 MJ/lap	+2.4 (+1.9%)
  8 MJ	125.4 MJ/lap	127.7 MJ/lap	+2.3 (+1.8%)

• The maximum fuel flow was increased in a rather inconsistent way.
  
  For petrol:
  

  hybrid	draft 4	draft 5
  0 MJ	93.5 kg/h	95.5 kg/h	+2.5 (+2.1%)
  2 MJ	91.5 kg/h	92.9 kg/h	+2.4 (+1.5%)
  4 MJ	88.5 kg/h	90.4 kg/h	+1.9 (+2.1%)
  6 MJ	86.0 kg/h	87.8 kg/h	+1.8 (+2.1%)
  8 MJ	85.0 kg/h	87.3 kg/h	+2.3 (+2.7%)

  For diesel:
  

  hybrid	draft 4	draft 5
  0 MJ	83.0 kg/h	84.6 kg/h	+1.6 (+1.9%)
  2 MJ	82.0 kg/h	84.5 kg/h	+2.5 (+3.0%)
  4 MJ	80.0 kg/h	82.2 kg/h	+2.2 (+2.8%)
  6 MJ	77.0 kg/h	79.5 kg/h	+2.5 (+3.2%)
  8 MJ	75.0 kg/h	77.3 kg/h	+2.3 (+3.1%)

[MyNameIsNigel]

I am still intrigued by the new torque metering provision. What does the ACO-FIA want to achieve by measuring torque at the output of the power unit ? Close a loophole of some sort ?

[TF110]

The wording is tricky, but is it confirmed that the fins have to stay the same as they are now? No 'sloping' fins to the rear wing?

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

I am still intrigued by the new torque metering provision. What does the ACO-FIA want to achieve by measuring torque at the output of the power unit ? Close a loophole of some sort ?

Just another input for their logging box. As deggis suggests, this is probably just another parameter for the ACO/FIA to balance performance between the different powertrain options.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Just another input for their logging box. As deggis suggests, this is probably just another parameter for the ACO/FIA to balance performance between the different powertrain options.

So torque output is going to become a BoP parameter ? Thought the new regulations were supposed to put emphasis on energy usage efficiency

[Mal]

I don't understand in the drive for efficiency why the ACO doesn't set a much lower weight limit to challenge the engineers to find efficient construction solutions as well as engine tech.

[TF110]

I feel the same way. Even 800kg is a big difference. -30kg to 870kg? Half that is the disparity between some drivers!

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Mal

I don't understand in the drive for efficiency why the ACO doesn't set a much lower weight limit to challenge the engineers to find efficient construction solutions as well as engine tech.

Too low weight limits tend to lead to substantial investments in chassis design, therefore higher costs. Higher weight limits would also tend to allow privateers to compete on more equal footing IMO. I agree however that it's a bit disappointing to note that the weight limits have been increased again.

Weight limits that are closer to 900-1000kg are also more "relevant" to actual production cars. Would a 500-600kg chassis be more relevant ?

[TF110]

Yes. These prototypes are much lower than road cars. Also less complex and luxurious. 800kg would have been ideal IMO. Only 100kg less than where they are now. They had LMP2's running 5 years ago weighing less than that.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Too low weight limits tend to lead to substantial investments in chassis design, therefore higher costs. Higher weight limits would also tend to allow privateers to compete on more equal footing IMO. I agree however that it's a bit disappointing to note that the weight limits have been increased again.

Privateers already ran with 880 kg in ALMS last year. In 2014 the weight will only be decreased by 30 kg for them.

Of course privateers will like return to bigger and therefor heavier engines, but the narrower car and tyres will automatically decrease the weight.

I agree that the minimum weight numbers for 2014 are disappointing, especially because at one point some manufacturers were pushing for 775 kg.

[TF110]

The older LMP2 HPD's and Porsche's which were running in ALMS were at or around that weight against Audi.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Weight limits that are closer to 900-1000kg are also more "relevant" to actual production cars. Would a 500-600kg chassis be more relevant ?

I guess absolutely thinking 1 kg more makes them more relevant to road cars, but then when you consider the difference in materials, constructions and other requirements (is luggage space now in the rules?)... yeah, still pretty and almost as irrelevant.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by deggis

I guess absolutely thinking 1 kg more makes them more relevant to road cars, but then when you consider the difference in materials, constructions and other requirements (is luggage space now in the rules?)... yeah, still pretty and almost as irrelevant.

For sure

[Mike E]

Presumably these cars have to be ballasted up to the minimum weight limit, which means having lumps of lead or something squirrelled away in the chassis. It must break an engineers heart to have to do it.

Heavier cars also have bigger accidents. Momentum = mass x velocity. If a car with ballast can pass a crash test, then a car without ballast can as well. Raising the minimum weight limit seems a strange thing to do.

[gregtummer]

I wonder how much of it is to keep the cars at a reasonable speed?

I'm especially thinking of the Porsche Curves. LMP1s gobble up GT cars like a Pacman in the Porsche Curves. Imagine how much worse it will be if they only weighed 800kgs instead of 870kgs?

[TF110]

Less weight = less distance in braking and more maneuverability. That would mean they could slow down faster and easier, and also move through traffic better since they're more nimble. In ALMS a few years ago, they had LMP2 cars weighing 775kg for the Porsche RS spyder, with a little power help it was able to hang with the Audi R10, even beat them occasionally.

[porman]

Originally Posted by TF110

Less weight = less distance in braking and more maneuverability. That would mean they could slow down faster and easier, and also move through traffic better since they're more nimble. In ALMS a few years ago, they had LMP2 cars weighing 775kg for the Porsche RS spyder, with a little power help it was able to hang with the Audi R10, even beat them occasionally.

Man if that wasn't some excellent racing for as long as it lasted.

[gregtummer]

What is amazing is that in 2008, and LMP2 car qualified at a 3:32 at Le Mans!

[HORNDAWG]

The future

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvRp7...ature=youtu.be








L.P.

[Acid09]

More like the end of racing.

I don't understand people that get excited about electrical cars...the day the sound is gone from racing is the day I'm done with it...sorry.

[Gingers4Justice]

Absolutely agree. You wouldn't take 'sight' away from racing, but for some reason the next sense 'sound' is not considered important to a number of important people. The noise - and I mean that word - is part of the product motorsport sells.

I sincerely hope that Drayson's comments about this being the sound of the future look silly in years to come.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by TF110

Less weight = less distance in braking and more maneuverability. That would mean they could slow down faster and easier, and also move through traffic better since they're more nimble. In ALMS a few years ago, they had LMP2 cars weighing 775kg for the Porsche RS spyder, with a little power help it was able to hang with the Audi R10, even beat them occasionally.

With a little help? I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Gingers4Justice

Absolutely agree. You wouldn't take 'sight' away from racing, but for some reason the next sense 'sound' is not considered important to a number of important people. The noise - and I mean that word - is part of the product motorsport sells.

I sincerely hope that Drayson's comments about this being the sound of the future look silly in years to come.

Not just the sound, but the smell too... but yes, the sound is more important. I'm not a fan of watching life size "slot cars" driving around a race track.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

With a little help? I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

A little power help? How do you not understand what I'm saying? They aren't quite as powerful now as they were.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by TF110

Less weight = less distance in braking and more maneuverability. That would mean they could slow down faster and easier, and also move through traffic better since they're more nimble. In ALMS a few years ago, they had LMP2 cars weighing 775kg for the Porsche RS spyder, with a little power help it was able to hang with the Audi R10, even beat them occasionally.

775Kg was only in the beginning. The ACO quickly and steadily increased the weight of the RS Spyder until by 2008 the car weighed 825KG. After that (2009) the ACO introduced new restrictor rules that reduced the power ot 440 hp (from original 503). A real shame.