[WEC] BoP. Brilliant or Pants.

[Adam43]

FWIW, I think they’ll be adjustments for the next race (which is ages away )

We’ve catalogued the changes made comprehensively in this thread. Not just the weight changes, which can’t be seen in isolation.

They’ll be changes and it will be to Toyota’s disadvantage.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Articus

Regarding Qatar, Toyota had both compounds available. Nothing worked for them.

Regarding the tire point, remember that it was not "just" a tire allocation thing. You only have to consider stints on the same tire. We saw like for like conditions at the start of the race on the medium tires for Toyota and Porsche and the Toyota drove away from the Porsches that were also on the mediums at a breakneck speed.

https://i.postimg.cc/rwYCKTwM/image.png

Yes, they are pretty good at the tyre thing and can manage it. No “just” about it. It is part and parcel of the same thing. Knowing you can and being able to commit to just one.

To be clear I’m not saying the pace advantage was just this. Not at all. But it could well be as important as any BoP.

Also interestingly the pace difference between the two Toyotas was about half the difference between the Toyota and the rest. The variation across other manufacturers is as big as the gap. We are talking about differences that are similar order to the natural variations. It is hard to get it closer than that.

Not that the aim is to get it the same every time.

[Articus]

I was searching for something else, but in that search I was reminded of the explainer released by the ACO before Le Mans.

The purpose of BoP is to balance the cars’ performance potential. In other words, it assumes that each car is exploited to the hilt. It is not designed to erase performance deltas between two cars built by the same manufacturer or to help an abnormally slow competitor make up the entire gap on their rivals. Nor does it replace operational performance – whether that be tyre management, driver ability, pit time or racing performance – which are all decisive factors and the major component of overall performance.

https://www.dailysportscar.com/2024/...their%20rivals.


So according to the ACO, they do not balance tire management. The question I have about this is whether or not this considers how the setting granted by the BOP, influences tire management.

A car with a pace deficit has to push harder to attempt to keep up. A car with a performance advantage doesn't have to push so hard to keep up, and that comes with a tire management benefit.

We saw how in Qatar and Imola, Toyota wasn't particularly fast, and didn't really have a tire management advantage either. Ferrari triple stinted its tires in Imola, but they also had a considerable performance margin which might have allowed them to do that.

Because of this, I think it is difficult to decouple tire management from the performance granted by the BOP settings. If you have performance to spare, it's easier to look after the tires while still outpacing those behind.

You also have the effect of BOP weight and BOP power settings on tire management. A heavier car might use more tires and more power stresses the rear tires more.

[chernaudi]

One thing that must be pointed out (if it already hasn't been) is that even though teams do have tire compound choice, everyone has the same basic choices in compound ranges and construction. Since 2021, the ACO and FIA banned "confidential" or proprietary tires for factory teams, and got Michelin to make basically "spec" tires of the same basic construction and compound for everyone.


In GT3 and especially LMP2, this isn't a problem, where in GT3 there's no hybrid systems, and in LMP2, where everyone has by and large the exact same car (though Goodyear is the tire supplier for those classes in the WEC, vs Michelin in the equivalent classes in IMSA, or in WEC LMH and IMSA GTP).


At Le Mans or somewhere else along the line, it was said that the GTPs with their rear wheel drive hybrid systems are both giving a rearward weight bias and operate on the rear wheels. LMH cars have front wheel hybrid systems that put more weight up front and, of course, operate on the front wheels.


It has to be remember back in the day not only did Audi and Toyota run their own spec of tires due to that fact, but Audi when they ran both hybrid and non-hybrid R18s they did run a compromise tire that could work equally well on both, but not 100% optimal for either.


I do wonder if the actual result of the Michelin LMH/GTP tires do currently unintentionally favor the LMH cars. Because, the IMSA spec tires are different I think than the WEC tires, as well as tire allocations in similar length races also being different.


Problem is that if the ACO and FIA allow Michelin to address those LMH and GTP format differences, that opens up not only another BOP variable (even if LMH and GTP keep the same basic tire within that subclass), but it can also open up its own can of worms for obvious reasons.

[Gerard C]

As you suggest BoP settings influence performance, tire management included. I wonder how they manage those settings to the Porsches. During the Brasil FP1 we saw Penske, Jota and Proton very close but later on the Penske cars took an advantage over the other Porsches. Tire management or other things?

[Gerard C]

As to tyre choice ist only three compounds avalaible for LMH and LMDh. At the end of the brazilian race Porsche found that the best mix was medium front and hard rear when the Toyotas with their FWD could cope with medium front and rear.

[Adam43]

Yes, the weight of the car impacts the tyre management. Practically goes without saying.

Toyota, generally, has had to run heavier. It is of no surprise that when this isn’t the case their ability to manage things better comes to the fore.

Different sides of the same coin.

It’s easier to mange tyres, reliability, energy use, everything when you are quick. It is easier to be quick when tyres, reliability, energy use, everything is under control.

It’s neither fully one thing nor the other. It is all these wonderful endurance racing things.

And there will always be an impact of BoP settings on pace. It’s physics - weight and power make a difference. That’s why they have the adjustments!

That any car ends up a little faster or a little slower does not mean BoP is wrong, nor that it is right.

[tomcug]

BOP for COTA will surely be interesting. Imagine Toyota crying if they get 1080 kg, they surely won't be silent if that happens

[Adam43]

I would have some sympathy with 20kg increase. Even if there was more power.

But with all that is going on it will be hard for the ACO to judge.

[broadrun96]

Well we all know it will be the Caddy and Penske Porsches at the front of BoP because Austin so US bias of course. Well except it is Toyota and Ferrari's biggest market and Toyota has multiple plants in the US so maybe they should be ahead. Guess we can agree though the French teams and IF are screwed right?

[S griffin]

It’s not something that’s easy to implement. Especially with many other factors involved. Certainly it would be nice to see them battling it out on equal terms

[Matador]

Originally Posted by S griffin

It’s not something that’s easy to implement. Especially with many other factors involved. Certainly it would be nice to see them battling it out on equal terms

What say you? One exhibition race at the end of the year, minimum weight, maximum power no points but a special trophy?

Originally Posted by tomcug

BOP for COTA will surely be interesting. Imagine Toyota crying if they get 1080 kg, they surely won't be silent if that happens

They managed okay at 1080kg last year, but I think that it would certainly be unfair with how far along the development curve Porsche and Ferrari have come. They'd have all right to be salty about it.

[Gerard C]

I think French teams are fairly treated but IF can expect better IMO.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by tomcug

BOP for COTA will surely be interesting. Imagine Toyota crying if they get 1080 kg, they surely won't be silent if that happens

One would hope the ACO doesn't overreact. By my estimations, it just needs +10kg.

[Adam43]

10kg?!

Surely it is +8kg with +2kW, offset by 0.8% gain >250kph. Obviously it would also need +1MJ for COTA.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Adam43

10kg?!

Surely it is +8kg with +2kW, offset by 0.8% gain >250kph. Obviously it would also need +1MJ for COTA.

I'm sure it can be divided into both weight and power but as long as the same outcome is achieved, it won't matter in the end.




Toyota was not competitive when they were between 30-40kg more than the Porsche. Toyota was too fast when they were only 9-11kg more than the Porsche. The balance is somewhere in the middle to me, around +20kg to the Porsche and around +10kg to the Ferrari with the current power figures. There might still be performance variation but with only 1-2 tenths either way, no manufacturer comes back from an extra 2 minutes of stoppage.

[Articus]

Something that I would really like to see done is an analysis of the wet weights of the hypercars (fuel and driver included).

The LMH cars don't need as much fuel due to a larger energy recovery system. So in practice their wet weights could closer to LMDH weights than the BOP table would imply, which gives a different perspective to the performance in the races.

[Gerard C]

I think +20kg to the Porsche(s) would be overracting.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by Gerard C

I think +20kg to the Porsche(s) would be overracting.

Sorry if I was not clear. I did not mean give the Porsche +20kg. I meant the Toyota should be roughly 20kg heavier than the Porsche. 30-40kg more is too much (Qatar, Imola, Spa), and only 10kg more (Le Mans, Brazil) is too little based on the performance at the previous circuits.

[tomcug]

Originally Posted by Matador

They managed okay at 1080kg last year, but I think that it would certainly be unfair with how far along the development curve Porsche and Ferrari have come. They'd have all right to be salty about it.

Toyota's car is an absolute killer, at least when not carrying too much sandbags. 1080 kg wouldn't be much of a problem for them in a post Le Mans era. Without any doubt the fastest at equal BOP, also most versatile, good at every track (or almost every, dunno about Qatar). Ferrari on the other hand is Le Mans special, Porsche more universal but still no match for Toyota, not anywhere near. One way or another, big BOP penatly for Yota or not, next race will be very interesting.

[Articus]

COTA will be only the 3rd race for the power gain experiment. There is still a lot of inexperience with this new parameter.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Ferrari raced there in the GT class, not the prototype class, and Penske never race there--Porsche competed there with their own factory team in 2014.

The Porsche team is not just "Penske". Thomas Laudenbach and the many other german support engineers do not work for Penske. It's a joint effort between the Penske racing team and Porsche's engineering team in Weissach, the same people responsible for the 919.

I also mentioned that Ferrari and AF Corse have raced at the circuit with GT cars. They have some understanding of the tarmac, and the simulator models of the track. LMH cars are also closer to GT cars than LMP cars, as has been described by several LMH drivers.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Ferrari raced there in the GT class, not the prototype class, and Penske never race there--Porsche competed there with their own factory team in 2014.

The Porsche team is not just "Penske". It's "Porsche-Penske Motorsport". It is a joint effort between the Penske racing team and Porsche's engineering team in Weissach, the same people responsible for the 919. So they do have experience at the circuit.

I also mentioned that Ferrari and AF Corse have raced at the circuit with GT cars. They have some understanding of the tarmac, and the simulator models of the track. LMH cars are also closer to GT cars than LMP cars, as has been described by several hypercar drivers and one of the main reasons Andre Lotterer has struggled in the 963 compared to his GT-bred teammates. They don't drive like high downforce LMP1 cars. They drive like high power GT cars.

Circuit experience was not a big issue here for Porsche and Ferrari.

[TF110]

It's been 10 years since they've raced there. The track surface has changed a lot too. Reading on sc365 that it's deteriorated quite a bit and we saw much slower lap times compared to the last time. So there's more to it than just weights and power imo. Somehow Toyota got it right. I think it's mostly attributed to experience with their car vs lmp1, plus there was no pause in their program so they understand what works in comparison to their previous generation car. Qatar was an outlier for sure. New track, and 1089kg didn't work out so well for them. Hopefully there's no knee-jerk reactions on the bop front. I think minor changes would be fine.

[Gerard C]

Yes, minor changes will be enough. Many must make the necessary efforts to find a place on the podium. And we should not forget that the Toyota/Ferrari vs Porsche fight is LMH vs LMHd too. So as it's been the case for ages now in car racing, weight is the issue and I think any BoP adjustment is now made keeping this in mind.