LMP2 engine changes? (merged)

[gwyllion]

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.

[dj4monie]

BTW the Panoz V8 is a Production based Ford DOHC V8 orginally sourced from the Cobra Mustang/ Ford Lighting, sans Supercharger.

Ford started developing this engine to replace it 40 year old OHV Windsor based engines for all other racing and competition used, but NASCAR.

[Fogelhund]

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]

I must agree that I am really disappointed with the reliability of LMP1 this year. There were just too many new/unproven cars. Will we have the same problem next year with everybody running hybrids this year needing to develop a true LMP1 one?

[gwyllion]

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).

[Fogelhund]

Frankly, the finishing percentages tell me the following.

1./ Many cars simply aren't really designed to the endurance required for a race that is 24 hours.

2./ Often, the team level of preperation and expertise are not where it is required to run a 24 hour race. Is it any suprise that LMP1, LMP2 and GT1 cars that finished near the top, were the best prepared and funded teams?

3./ GT2 simply had an unlucky year.

4./ Ongoing testing and development are really required to turn a good car, into a good 24 hour car. Which of the LMP2's have had that kind of development? None. Results as expected then.

Mandating a whole series of rules changes is not going to make the teams better prepared, or parts more tested. Either teams/manufacturers need to sort their cars out better, or there needs to be more real enduro's to better test these cars.

Does anybody else think that by the time Porsche sorts out their Spyder, and sells them, and Acura gets their Courage's and Lola's sorted, that these reliability issues will become things of the past?

Does anybody else think that the longer they don't tinker with the rules, the more likely these cars will actually be developed to last through 24 hours?

Certainly Rollcentre's decision to go with a more robust gearbox seems to be very intelligent in my opinion, and one that shows a car being built to true endurance specifications. More work needs to be done in this direction by all teams and manufacturers.

Increasing the weight of these cars, allowing for stronger parts, would be a positive step.

[ger80]

Its not only the weight, its also center of gravity what makes lightweight design necessary and cars less reliable and more expensive. With the new rules for 2010 the ACO should use LMP1 engine sizes for LMP2 with LMP2 restrictor and weight up to 900kg. This would make the gap between P1/p2 larger and thats good.
Additional I would like to see one tire manufactorer only for LMP2, or a tire cost limit. Less expensive tires give smaller teams the chance to test a little more, because the engine isnt the most cost factor if the use the "big" ones like written above.