The never ending Toyota return to Le Mans (LMP1) Saga

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by TF110

Diesel is more powerful. Diesel is more efficient. Theres no denying that. If there is an equivalence issue, this time theres Porsche there to also look at. So while you don't care about the debate, Im pretty sure it will be a talking point. This time around if theres an issue it wont be just with one team on balancing to diesel, but two.

So Im keen to see if they get it right this time instead of letting one fuel walk over the competition.

Sure.

For the time being at least, we have not heard Porsche representatives complaining about the diesel-petrol equivalence (unless I've missed something...). We did get reports more than a year ago that Toyota representatives (in particular Kinoshita) were not satisfied by the current Appendix B figures, especially in terms of the targeted fuel efficiency figure for petrol which was seemingly too extreme to reach according to Toyota.

Are Toyota now satisfied by the current state of the rules, which have not substantially changed since then ?

Was this just a "political" game aimed at putting pressure on the ACO-FIA ?

Have Porsche found the trick ?

Too many questions. Too few answers.

[Thaw Daggerslash]

Originally Posted by TF110

Whats the point in running two cars all year when youre not running favorable rules? They already lost LeMans and the wec title, I'd rather they put the money wasted on running another car behind diesels to a 2014 car that trounces the competition.

And whose fault is that? Nobody forced them to go down that route.

Blaming "unfavourable rules" is just a convenient way for a manufacturer to get out of admitting that they've done a half-assed job. It's never their fault, oh no! Like it was never their fault in Formula One for years either, and not their fault when they got found out for cheating in the WRC...

It's what really gets my goat about motorsport at the moment. Manufacturers whining at supposedly unfair rules/regulations. Stop whining, do a better job, and they probably wouldn't be at such a "disadvantage." I have absolutely no doubts that Porsche will be a lot closer to Audi than Toyota will be next year, despite running a petrol engine and not a diesel one.

[/soapbox]

[Rennen]

Originally Posted by Thaw Daggerslash

And whose fault is that? Nobody forced them to go down that route.


[/soapbox]

How do you know!

[TF110]

Sorry for the double post, but this interview with Anthony Davidson is very good- http://www.toyotahybridracing.com/an...dson-in-depth/

[Victor_RO]

Toyota bringing both cars to Shanghai. No Nakajima in the #7 though due to FNippon commitments.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

Toyota bringing both cars to Shanghai. No Nakajima in the #7 though due to FNippon commitments.

Good news. Let's hope they do the same for the ultimate round as well.

This decision is a bit "strange", though, in view of Toyota's previous announcement that they would be splitting their efforts between the ongoing WEC season and the development of the new car.

This decision is not inconsistent with what Toyota announced previously (they said that the line-up for the final two races was going to be announced in "due course"), but one may wonder where the logic/coherence is.

[bentley speed 8]

That's great

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by MyNameIsNigel

Good news. Let's hope they do the same for the ultimate round as well.

This decision is a bit "strange", though, in view of Toyota's previous announcement that they would be splitting their efforts between the ongoing WEC season and the development of the new car.

This decision is not inconsistent with what Toyota announced previously (they said that the line-up for the final two races was going to be announced in "due course"), but one may wonder where the logic/coherence is.

I would guess it's also probably related to the early stoppage and lack of running at Fuji.

[MyNameIsNigel]

Originally Posted by Victor_RO

I would guess it's also probably related to the early stoppage and lack of running at Fuji.

Indeed. It's possible that Toyota have tried "new" things on their TS030 (as the improved performance in free practice and qualifying practice at Fuji would suggest) that they now want to race.

[vincegail]

New, improved Toyotas? And two of them? Bring it on!

Glad to see the beancounters have come to their senses.

[chernaudi]

I believe that this has a lot to do with the Fuji race being abandoned, and, probably in Toyota's view, being a "non-race" or a "gift".

And if that's Toyota's stance, I don't blame them one bit. They clearly wanted to win Fuji by racing, not being essentially handed a win because of something out of their and everyone else's control.

[TF110]

They probably had a win barring incident anyway. Their pace was only a tenth or two off Audi's ultimately and could go 4 laps further. Its the hybrid zones making the difference. Turn 1 is the 2nd slowest on the track, advantage Toyota. Turn 6 is around 100kmh, advantage Toyota. The final two activation points are each below 100kmh. Advatage Toyota. Thats why they were upset about COTA having only 4 activation zones being a kilometer longer than Fuji.

[Japanese Samurai]

According to Response.jp (Japanese motorsports news website),
Last year, Toyota Racing devision has turned a profit by itself for first time.
Although they have not achieved results over the race, they have achieved results over business.
Kiyotaka Ise (Executive directors) says that the thermal efficiency of the TS030 engine reached to 40%.
http://response.jp/article/2013/10/20/208954.html

[gwyllion]

So the TS030 engine is already at 40% efficiency?!

That puts their statement that above 40% efficiency is a dream that nobody can achieve, into a different perspective.

And what is it that has angered Mr Kinosh!ta so much that he would threaten to pull out of the world's most famous endurance race? Fuel efficiency issues.

He explained that the current petrol engines have a fuel efficiency rating of around 38 per cent, but will have to reach 41.5 to race in 2014. "Above 40 or above 41.5 per cent for the gasoline engines is a dream, nobody can achieve it. If you categorise the diesels the target is 42.5 per cent and this number they already achieved 22 years before in diesel."

"It looks fair... It looks like it opens windows, but [the] windows are so small you cannot go into [them]," insisted Kinosh!ta.

"The diesel engines target should be more than 45 or 45 per cent, then it's a very fair target. Our target, I cannot reach. Their [diesel] target is under the table."

source: http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2012...k-to-wrc-30907

Apparently, Toyota declared in the SAE 2011 High Efficiency IC Engines Symposium to have achieved above 42% efficiency in R&D prototypes:

The engine used in the first- and second-generation Prius (the 1.5L 1NZ-FXE) had a thermal efficiency of about 37%; the thermal efficiency of the new 1.8L unit in the third-generation Prius (2ZR-FXE) has a thermal efficiency of about 38%. Toyota is targeting a thermal efficiency of more than 40% with what Nakata called its Future Concept 1, followed by thermal efficiency of more than 45% in Future Concept 2 (which is based on concept 1).

...

Concept 1 is a cooled EGR stoichiometric spark-ignited direct-injection concept, featuring a long stroke design (stroke/bore=1.5) and cooled EGR with an EGR ratio of more than 30%. The long-stroke design (lengthening the stroke while maintaining displacement), reduces heat loss and also increases piston speed, creating more turbulence. A high tumble ratio intake port (TTR=3.0) and a high-energy ignition system (100 mJ) also contribute to improved combustion. Toyota is continuing to reduce friction.

Concept 2 is a turbocharged lean burn concept, built on the base of concept 1. It also uses the long stroke design, with a high tumble ratio and a higher-energy ignition system (150 mJ).

...

Nakata said that the engine team has currently delivered a 42.4% thermal efficiency in concept 1 and 43.7% thermal efficiency in concept 2.

source: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011...-20110411.html

[Maelochs]

The fact that an experimental 1.8-liter engine built exclusively to be hyper-efficient for use recharging a battery pack has no bearing on what a race engine can achieve.

Apparently a race-ready diesel can come a lot closer tot the ACO target than a race-ready petrol engine can.

[gwyllion]

I don't understand what you are saying. Their current race engine surpassed their state-of-the-art production engine: the Prius engine achieves a maximum efficiency of 38.5%, whereas the TS030 engine reaches up to 40%

[Japanese Samurai]

Yes.
Ise says that the thermal efficiency of the present engine is 40%, and it exceeds that of Prius(38.5%).

[TF110]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I don't understand what you are saying. Their current race engine surpassed their state-of-the-art production engine: the Prius engine achieves a maximum efficiency of 38.5%, whereas the TS030 engine reaches up to 40%

Right. He said it was a hard to get 41.5% thermal efficiency. Theyre at 40% now pushing it! If they are ahead of the Prius which is already in its 4th year of production, it shouldn't be surprising. At least not surprising they're ahead of a 4 year old car. Toyota's TS030 was introduced in 2012 compared to the Prius in 2009. So perhaps next year's TS030 will have slightly better efficiency than the future Prius, or maybe equal. So above 41.5% is still tough but perhaps it is within reach. Still not at the diesel efficiency though

[gwyllion]

For me it is still a surprise because the TS030 engine is missing all the modern techniques for an efficient petrol engine: Atkinson or Miller instead of Otto cycle, bigger displacement/lower revs to reduce friction losses, direct fuel injection, variable valve timing, turbocharging, ...

Furthermore, the Prius has a e-CVT transmission. So the engine is designed to operate a limited rev band.

[ger80]

40% is just the engine without exhaust energy recovery system? They will obviously increase the number ...

[Japanese Samurai]

It is not understood whether the "present engine" means 2013 engines or 2014 engines.
His comment was made at the meeting with leaders of Toyota Racing and Japanese motorsport journalists at FSW on Qualifying day.
Therefore, his comment was made on the assumption that it will be reported.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

For me it is still a surprise because the TS030 engine is missing all the modern techniques for an efficient petrol engine: Atkinson or Miller instead of Otto cycle, bigger displacement/lower revs to reduce friction losses, direct fuel injection, variable valve timing, turbocharging, ...

Furthermore, the Prius has a e-CVT transmission. So the engine is designed to operate a limited rev band.

Toyota use the otto cycle in their road car engines. The prius mimics the atkinson cycle with the vvt-i, you can read about the differences all over, like this site http://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/...ted-out-to-be/. In the 2014 rules, Im not entirely sure but isn't variable valve timing not allowed? BTW, Kiyotaka Ise is head of Lexus International.

[Félix]

We're relying on experimental/marketing data on a range extender for future Priuses to make assumptions about a racing engine? Efficiency inevitably goes down as you scale up from a low power generator to a race engine that has to make 4-5 times that power figure and account for 75% of a racecar's power output (ie rev harder and fit inside a race car).

Prius engines can be compared to similarly low-power diesel engines: the Mercedes/smart CDI engine was most certainly already at least this efficient 15 years ago. VAG's unbeatable racing diesels came almost a decade later...so a petrol race engine benefiting from recent advances might also be a decade away; or maybe a few years away. It most certainly is very unlikely to be ready soon, especially when Toyota seems to be $kimping and talking about barely updating their current (old) race engine.

Porsche will be interesting because their technology is most probably cutting edge with a brand new race engine and it's coming from the VAG group who have pretty much proven that they're the #1 makers of fine engine technology in the 21st century. Except Audi always looked like they were behind Peugeot in the engine race when they were competing against each other: and yet they were able to dominate, mainly in spite of their slight technical disadvantage. One could even argue that they don't have to push as hard now that no one will be using the same technology; they only have to use the inherent technical edge the regs and their technology give them (torque and consumption) to refine a proven race engine family into a package that is reliable and powerful enough not to be beaten by engines using technology that, until proven otherwise, remains inherently technically inferior.

Relying on Audi's performance as the single diesel entry to balance the future engine regs could very well lead us to another decade of Audi magically improving just enough every year to beat other entrants and their inherently inferior technology; therefore I think the ACO should stack the regs *artificially* against them for a year or two, just enough so that they would unquestionably no longer be #1 technology-wise, in the interest of the sport.

[kurski]

John Martin: There was a potential opportunity to test with Toyota at the end of last year, but that never happened and they were a bit unsure about what they were doing and what budget they had.

[Acid09]

So I guess that confirms that Toyota was toying with the possibility of entering a third car for Le Mans back then.

At the end of last year, all six current drivers had already been confirmed.