[WEC] BoP. Brilliant or Pants.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I’ll do the consistency lap time spread thing when I get back from holiday.

Thank you, I used a cheap, easy built in function in excel, but that makes it hard to show certain things in a single plot.

[Adam43]

I tried to show the spread. Then you can see cars that were faster for a few laps and those that won over longer periods. It was quite nice and then when Racecar Engineering did the same I was very happy!

[Articus]

Sector 3 (average, deficit, standard deviation), based on all S3 times below 99.0 seconds.







Unsurprisingly, S3 shows the largest standard deviation since traffic hurts laptime the most in S3.

[Articus]

The cutoff laptimes that I used for the dry laptimes in each sector are on the surface not obvious, but when looking at the laptime distribution in the histogram layout, it's obvious that this is where the bell curve ends for the dry laptimes and where the second "bell" begins for the wet laptimes.

As an example, for Toyota laptimes:




In theory, I could rewatch the race, mark the lap numbers where the rain was, and then filter based on lap number but this would be incredibly tedious. I prefer the easy way out...

[tomcug]

Originally Posted by Articus

The #4 Penske car looks like it was running less downforce than the #5 and the #6 Penske cars, but ultimately the #4 car was the slowest Penske car in the dry conditions which highlights the compromise that Penske had to make. Trimming their car out didn't make them faster overall. To chase top speed of the Ferrari and the Toyota, they would have made their cars slower overall. As a general observation, the LMDh cars have more tire wear than the LMH cars which is why it can be useful for them to run more downforce to better protect the tires.

Thanks a lot for more accurate approach that confirmed my visual observations for LMDh drag vs downforce vs laptimes. One might wonder if it looks any different for a car designed primarly for WEC competition which is the Alpine but if this year's race was an accurate representation of what this car can do (maybe next year it's different), then low downforce approach didn't do them much good either.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by tomcug

Thanks a lot for more accurate approach that confirmed my visual observations for LMDh drag vs downforce vs laptimes. One might wonder if it looks any different for a car designed primarly for WEC competition which is the Alpine but if this year's race was an accurate representation of what this car can do (maybe next year it's different), then low downforce approach didn't do them much good either.

The Alpine was an interesting approach this year. They had great top speed, as good as Ferrari and Toyota, but tended to be much slower in the final sector, relative. Also, riding onboards, they were losing a LOT of time in the dirty air of another car in the Porsche curves compared to other cars that I watched onboard. So they were low drag, but with great consequence, seemingly lacking downforce compared to Toyota and Ferrari.

This was also apparent because they were struggling on outlaps and with low front tire temperatures all weekend.

There's a lot to improve with that car for next year. In principle, this should be the best LMDh car on the grid, if you look how much the Acura has to be "slowed" in IMSA competition.

[tomcug]

Originally Posted by Articus

In principle, this should be the best LMDh car on the grid, if you look how much the Acura has to be "slowed" in IMSA competition.

Needs a reliable engine first.

[TF110]

Originally Posted by tomcug

Needs a reliable engine first.

Too bad they can't use the Honda!

[Articus]

Originally Posted by TF110

Too bad they can't use the Honda!

There's been a rumor brewing that Alpine will race in IMSA soon so it's definitely out of the question.

[tomcug]

https://en.endurance-info.com/auto/a...-17-kg-ferrari
Once again they put BOP before everybody else. Judging by the title Ferrari is properly adjusted vs Le Mans.

[Adam43]

Yeah. The bulletin hasn’t been released yet.

Have they kept the high speed power bump/drop? Could be important on the uphill straight.

[tomcug]

Gotta wait for someone to publish the tables

[Gerard C]

Originally Posted by tomcug

Gotta wait for someone to publish the tables

Dare!

[tomcug]

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...sao-paulo-bop/
That's a rather unexpected application of power gain there. Two cars that are quickest in the straight line get some rather generous adjustment (Toyota at 520 kW past 250 kph!). Surely this isn't Le Mans with lots of very long straights but makes you wonder where they get those values from

[Adam43]

Interesting. How does it look with the other adjustments?

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Interesting. How does it look with the other adjustments?

I was feeling a bit lazy, so came here hoping for your summary.

I only showed the values below 250km/h:





I know there is the power gain above 250km/h but I think majority of the circuit is below 250km/h and in theory the power gain factor above 250km/h is only meant to balance top speed on the 2 straights, so all cars would be "equally performing" above 250km/h. My intuition says they did a good job with this based on the trends from Spa. Porsche was slowed a small amount. Ferrari was slowed more. BMW, Alpine, Lamborghini all gained a bit. Cadillac is taken back to Spa values.

The curious one is Toyota. If Toyota is quick in Sao Paolo, it will prove that they sandbagged in the first part of the season for more favorable BOP at Le Mans. Otherwise, they'll be just as uncompetitive as the first 3 rounds.


The potential spanner in the works with the adjustments is the bumps and curbs in Sao Paolo. Some cars can handle them better than others. It may lead to unanticipated outcomes. My own assessment is that Alpine and Porsche struggle with bumpy tracks (Sebring, Imola) relative to their rivals. BMW, Cadillac, and Ferrari tend to be strong on bumpy tracks.

[Adam43]

I don’t know how that would prove that they purposely held back their performance, but I am constantly impressed with how people can prove things.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I don’t know how that would prove that they purposely held back their performance, but I am constantly impressed with how people can prove things.

I have not made any conclusions yet. They are just two logical deductions. Based on the parameters at the beginning of the year and how ACO had reverted Toyota to those figures for Sao Paolo, then the Toyota should not be competitive in Sao Paolo.

[Adam43]

Is it similar? I must look more. But there are quite a few tweaks.
Are the tracks and the conditions the same? Will then have the same tyre issues as Qatar on that surface and these weights?
Have they got more of a handle on the car based on these changes and latest tyres?
Is it outside normal variations from race to race that show up so easily in this tight field.



I predict everyone else started to sandbag for next year? Or maybe Caddy have for the US race?

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Is it similar? I must look more. But there are quite a few tweaks.
Are the tracks and the conditions the same? Will then have the same tyre issues as Qatar on that surface and these weights?
Have they got more of a handle on the car based on these changes and latest tyres?
Is it outside normal variations from race to race that show up so easily in this tight field.



I predict everyone else started to sandbag for next year? Or maybe Caddy have for the US race?

You are being facetious here.

[Adam43]

Yes. Purposely obviously so. But only in the last bit.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Is it similar? I must look more. But there are quite a few tweaks.
Are the tracks and the conditions the same? Will then have the same tyre issues as Qatar on that surface and these weights?
Have they got more of a handle on the car based on these changes and latest tyres?
Is it outside normal variations from race to race that show up so easily in this tight field.

I should be more precise. One of my predictors is simply the difference in power-to-weight and where this value is, relative to how the cars are observed to perform on track. I use Porsche as the reference, and then I compare them with Ferrari and Toyota.



In Qatar, Porsche was 14-15 "BOP points" ahead of Ferrari and Toyota. On the track, they were marginally ahead of Ferrari, and miles ahead of Toyota.

In Imola, Porsche was 3 BOP points ahead of Ferrari and 5 BOP points ahead of Toyota. Ferrari was miles ahead of Porsche but Toyota was behind them.

In Spa, Porsche was 7 BOP points ahead of Ferrari and 5 BOP points ahead of Toyota. Ferrari was ahead in qualifying and in the race until the red flag. Toyota was behind similar to Imola (although Porsche was a bit hobbled in Imola due to weakness of the 963 over the bumps so it's more obvious in Spa)

It's an imperfect science that has uncertainty introduced by race to race self-performance variance and sandbagging, but my general conclusion was that Porsche should be between 10 and 12 BOP points ahead of Ferrari to balance the two on each circuit, and that they should only be around 3-4 BOP points ahead of Toyota to balance them.

The Ferrari target for Sao Paolo is spot on. Porsche is roughly 13 BOP points ahead (so slightly better for Ferrari than Qatar where they were already only 2nd to Porsche in performance). The Toyota value doesn't look correct. Porsche is 10 BOP points ahead of Toyota. This is too much on the evidence of the first 3 races. On a normal circuit, Toyota has never been anywhere close to Porsche unless that margin was less than 5 BOP points so they should be even further behind than Spa and Imola.

The 2 stage power gain system muddies the picture a little bit. Maybe that 520kw above 250km/h for Toyota will compensate for the 10 BOP points deficit below 250km/w, but my assumption was that it was only to balance top speed, not make them much faster. Toyota had only 513kw above 250km/h in Le Mans compared to 511 for Porsche but Toyota was already quicker on the straights at Le Mans. In Sao Poalo it will be 512kw for Porsche against 520kw for Toyota. An increasein delta from 2kw to 8kW in Toyota's favor. Toyota should have an even higher top speed difference to Porsche than they had at Le Mans.

Hopefully they have nailed it in a way that I don't comprehend. Looking forward to a good race.

[Articus]

I decided to also look at it from a different angle, comparing BOP from Le Mans and Sao Poalo which both feature the two stage system.

Specifically I wanted to compare Porsche and Toyota. The values shown are the difference between Toyota and Porsche at Le Mans and Sao Paolo. "Power 1" is below 250km/h and "Power 2" is above 250km/h.

Toyota compared to Porsche at Le Mans:
Weight: +11kg
Power 1: -3kw
Power 2: +2kw

Toyota compared to Porsche At Sao Paolo:
Weight: +9kg
Power 1: -6kw
Power 2: +8kw


The weight difference between Porsche and Toyota is smaller than Le Mans. Only 9kg where it was 11 at Le Mans. Additionally, for the cost of 3kw below 250km/h, Toyota now has 8kw more above 250km/h compared to only +2kw more at that speed for Le Mans.


On this evidence you would predict that Toyota will be ahead of Porsche again and by a larger margin than Le Mans. The weight difference is smaller and the power above 250km/h is even greater than Le Mans. This doesn't make sense to me.

It also contradicts the previous post where I suggested that the Toyota needed to be within 3-4 BOP points of the Porsche to be competitive based on the first 3 rounds. Of course it contradicts because I never believed that Toyota was as slow as they showed in Qatar, Imola, and Spa and that is what the previous post reference was based on. The year on year BOP change shouldn't have produced such an uncompetitive Toyota.

[Adam43]

So some variation there.

My main objection to your assertion that it is proof is that it also requires the assumption that only Toyota was sandbagging! And that the ACO haven't noticed in the data that only they do it.

Development of all these cars. The circuit and conditions. The weight and influence on tyres. P/W is not that good a comparison when you then get circuit variation. etc... etc...

It's a hypothesis, not proof. There are other hypotheses that are just as good.

Another way to look at all the variations:

[Adam43]

Weight (Kg)

-- Bulletin --	--- Track ---	TOYOTA	GLICKENHAUS	ORECA	PEUGEOT	CADILLAC	FERRARI	PORSCHE	VANWALL	ALPINE	BMW	LAMBORGHINI	ISOTTA FRASCHINI
8/3/2023	Sebring	1062	1030		1049	1038	1057	1048	1030
8/3/2023	Portimao	1043	1030		1042	1035	1040	1045	1030
31/5/2023	Le Mans	1080	1030		1042	1046	1064	1048	1030
3/7/2023	Monza	1080	1030		1046	1032	1069	1049	1030
3/7/2023	Fuji	1080	1030		1038	1039	1076	1054	1030
3/7/2023	Bahrain	1080	1030		1041	1037	1075	1053	1030
26/10/2023	Bahrain	1080	1030		1041	1030	1075	1046	1030
16/2/2024	Qatar	1089			1030	1032	1075	1048		1070	1060	1041	1085
12/4/2024	Imola	1060			1061	1030	1041	1033		1042	1035	1034	1058
4/5/2024	Spa	1064			1065	1030	1053	1037		1045	1038	1035	1060
31/5/2024	Le Mans	1053			1047	1036	1043	1042		1038	1039	1039	1048
5/7/2024	Sao Paulo	1060			1051	1039	1060	1051		1044	1044	1039	1030
		GR010 Hybrid	-- 007 LMH --	---- R13 ----	---- 9X8 ----	- V-Series.R	--- 499P ----	---- 963 ----	Vandervell 680	A424	M Hybrid V8	SC63	Tipo6-C

Can the Lamborghini get down to that?

Max Power (kW)

-- Bulletin --	--- Track ---	TOYOTA	GLICKENHAUS	ORECA	PEUGEOT	CADILLAC	FERRARI	PORSCHE	VANWALL	ALPINE	BMW	LAMBORGHINI	ISOTTA FRASCHINI
8/3/2023	Sebring	517	520		518	513	515	517	511
8/3/2023	Portimao	512	520		516	513	509	516	512
31/5/2023	Le Mans	512	520		516	513	509	516	512
3/7/2023	Monza	507	520		520	498	497	506	520
3/7/2023	Fuji	514	520		520	505	505	514	520
3/7/2023	Bahrain	514	520		520	504	505	514	520
26/10/2023	Bahrain	514	520		520	504	505	514	520
16/2/2024	Qatar	510			520	499	503	505		510	506	502	514
12/4/2024	Imola	516			510	517	510	508		514	511	516	520
4/5/2024	Spa	515			508	516	506	507		513	510	514	520
31/5/2024	Le Mans	508			508	509	508	511		507	508	519	515
5/7/2024	Sao Paulo	506			510	519	503	512		516	512	519	520
		GR010 Hybrid	-- 007 LMH --	---- R13 ----	---- 9X8 ----	- V-Series.R	--- 499P ----	---- 963 ----	Vandervell 680	A424	M Hybrid V8	SC63	Tipo6-C

Max Power >250km/h (kW)

-- Bulletin --	--- Track ---	TOYOTA	GLICKENHAUS	ORECA	PEUGEOT	CADILLAC	FERRARI	PORSCHE	VANWALL	ALPINE	BMW	LAMBORGHINI	ISOTTA FRASCHINI
8/3/2023	Sebring	517	520		518	513	515	517	511
8/3/2023	Portimao	512	520		516	513	509	516	512
31/5/2023	Le Mans	512	520		516	513	509	516	512
3/7/2023	Monza	507	520		520	498	497	506	520
3/7/2023	Fuji	514	520		520	505	505	514	520
3/7/2023	Bahrain	514	520		520	504	505	514	520
26/10/2023	Bahrain	514	520		520	504	505	514	520
16/2/2024	Qatar	510			520	499	503	505		510	506	502	514
12/4/2024	Imola	516			510	517	510	508		514	511	516	520
4/5/2024	Spa	515			508	516	506	507		513	510	514	520
31/5/2024	Le Mans	513	0	0	504	509	499	511	0	512	513	511	520
5/7/2024	Sao Paulo	520	0	0	510	511	512	512	0	509	512	514	520
		GR010 Hybrid	-- 007 LMH --	---- R13 ----	---- 9X8 ----	- V-Series.R	--- 499P ----	---- 963 ----	Vandervell 680	A424	M Hybrid V8	SC63	Tipo6-C

And still we don't know what power they get at exactly 250km/h! It's outrageous that there is such uncertainty in the regulations

Energy Allocation (MJ)

-- Bulletin --	--- Track ---	TOYOTA	GLICKENHAUS	ORECA	PEUGEOT	CADILLAC	FERRARI	PORSCHE	VANWALL	ALPINE	BMW	LAMBORGHINI	ISOTTA FRASCHINI
8/3/2023	Sebring	913	911		909	905	908	912	900
8/3/2023	Portimao	904	913		908	904	899	910	901
31/5/2023	Le Mans	908	913		908	905	901	910	901
3/7/2023	Monza	908	916		914	890	893	899	913
3/7/2023	Fuji	907	909		908	894	898	906	903
3/7/2023	Bahrain	908	909		908	895	901	909	906
26/10/2023	Bahrain	908	909		908	894	901	908	906
16/2/2024	Qatar	914			904	890	902	900		909	904	895	917
12/4/2024	Imola	916			906	908	904	901		909	905	908	920
4/5/2024	Spa	917			910	909	905	904		913	907	908	923
31/5/2024	Le Mans	906			895	900	889	904		903	904	904	915
5/7/2024	Sao Paulo	912			909	907	905	908		910	908	909	915
		GR010 Hybrid	-- 007 LMH --	---- R13 ----	---- 9X8 ----	- V-Series.R	--- 499P ----	---- 963 ----	Vandervell 680	A424	M Hybrid V8	SC63	Tipo6-C

No change to Docking Time, or Front axle Power delivery speed (wet or dry).

A couple of thoughts:

• The newer cars for 2024 continue to settle. Isotta Fraschini gets a break. More data for that, Peugeot, BMW and Alpine (and all actually, but it's more important for them).
• There is something interesting with how these different cars get their speed. They could be seeing that the Toyota and Ferrari need less acceleration (higher weight / lower power), but that needs offsetting at higher speeds (although not completely with others). Hmmm?????????????????????