[WEC] 2018-2019 WEC Super Season

[NSX_LeMans]

Originally Posted by Chiana

I think the Interlagos WEC may be dead again after next year
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14...20-rio-gp-move

There is no way they could build a new track in Rio in time to make a switch next year. I believe those guys are all liars. They clearly don't know how things are done.
F1 going to Rio wouldn't affect a 6h race at Interlagos that much, the track runs on a profit even without F1.

[carbsmith]

GTE is a series?

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by NSX_LeMans

There is no way they could build a new track in Rio in time to make a switch next year. I believe those guys are all liars. They clearly don't know how things are done.
F1 going to Rio wouldn't affect a 6h race at Interlagos that much, the track runs on a profit even without F1.

The previous time this event was axed from WEC was caused by organisational disputes and money, was it not?

[TheMightyM]

Originally Posted by Chiana

The previous time this event was axed from WEC was caused by organisational disputes and money, was it not?

Pretty much — the underlying problem really was that the Brazilian economy was in a deep recession. Things have somewhat stabilized since then, but the country's economy still isn't firing on all cylinders. Judging by airline service patterns, Rio de Janerio has been particularly hard hit (down to only three daily flights to the U.S.).

The Brazilian government likes to use sports investment as an economic development strategy — they spent a ton of money building facilities for the World Cup and the Olympics. Building a new F1 track in general and in Rio in particular follows the pattern. And let's not forget that Interlagos isn't in the best of shape.

The real issue surrounding potential Brazilian WEC rounds after 2019/2020 might not be so much where it wound be held but rather the current rules uncertainty. Less manufacturer involvement in LMP1 and/or GTE means less money for the WEC while leaving the series less marketable. Brazil is an expensive trip. If the WEC is forced to shrink, Brazil might well be the first thing to be cut.

[NSX_LeMans]

Originally Posted by Chiana

The previous time this event was axed from WEC was caused by organisational disputes and money, was it not?

Fittipaldi paid the contractors about 10% of the agreed amount and had problems with ACO too. He is no longer involved with the event this time. So I think what TheMightyM said in his third paragraph applies.

[Deleted]

It might not be a bad thing, they don't really need South America, or most of Asia

[chernaudi]

Toyota get back their one lap per stint advantage in range for Le Mans:

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/1...Cz3EBf2Co5ZXGI

The ACO and FIA better not bring back the mandated stint lengths for GTE.

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Toyota get back their one lap per stint advantage in range for Le Mans:

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/1...Cz3EBf2Co5ZXGI

The ACO and FIA better not bring back the mandated stint lengths for GTE.

Grim.

Here is the supplementary regs extract from 2018 (can't find 2019):
"In terms of stint length, in any case, the maximum number of ‘green’ laps (without safety car, slow zone(s) and not depending on track conditions) should not exceed 11 laps for LMP1H and 10 laps for LMP1NH in Le Mans 2018 race"

I am going to assume 'track conditions' includes a declaration of a wet track and immediately start doing a rain dance.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

Toyota get back their one lap per stint advantage in range for Le Mans:

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/1...Cz3EBf2Co5ZXGI

The ACO and FIA better not bring back the mandated stint lengths for GTE.

HAHAHAHAH

The single worst thing about last year is back baby. All through the winter I've been saying "unless Toyota wants it back for the single race that actually matters" and here we are then. What a joke. And not only does it make mockery of the FIA-ACO agenda for "we've done everything we can" but of Toyota itself considering what they've been saying about wanting closer competition. Just as with success ballast, they're fine with all sorts of stuff for the "whatever" races, but not for LM. It's also funny how they are in a position of deciding and VETOing everything what is to be done, instead of the organizing body.

Oh well. Absurd penalties it is again then for teams accidentally doing better mileage than ordered and micro management mandated

[chernaudi]

I have the same problem with F1 and why the status quo has been preserved there. The teams have too much power in F1, when the FIA should be in charge.

Same issue here. OEMs/factory teams have too much power in LMP1, even when Audi and Porsche were around, especially from 2014 on. That's why the privateers got stiffed in the first place.

That's part of the reason I'm gravitating more towards GTE, where it seems that the stint length rule has been abolished. That, and the GTE and even most GT3 cars now remind me of JGTC/Super GT cars when they still ran production unit body chassis, especially the 1999-2002 GT500s.

Also gives meat to a Porsche Motorsport rep's statement from 2017 that said that LM is all that matters and the rest of the WEC is largely irrelevant.

[gert]

Originally Posted by Chiana

And not only does it make mockery of the FIA-ACO agenda for "we've done everything we can" but of Toyota itself considering what they've been saying about wanting closer competition.

"We want closer competition as long as we still win at the end."

The best result for Toyota would be to win after a race-long batlle with a privateer that finished only a few seconds behind.
The worst result for Toyota would be to finish a few seconds behind a privateer.

The best way to "guarantee" success / to make winning the most likely outcome is to have a massive advantage.

[gert]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

LM is all that matters and the rest of the WEC is largely irrelevant.

I think for a Manufacturer's point of view there are 2 things that are important: Le Mans and the final championship.
All other races are a means to get closer to that second goal but not really inmportant on their own.
(And winning Le Mans just happens to have a massive impact on that championship too)

I can probably name all Le Mans winning manufactureres of the last few year, and the championship winning manufacturers if I give it a try, but I can probably not even name 1 single other race winner.
(Apart from Spa 2019 because that was only yesterday)

[Akrapovic]

Sweet. Mandated stint lengths. Those were great last year because everyone was so sure that it wasn't a real rule and they'd never enforce it. Until they did.

Maximum stint lengths is nothing more than incompetence in developing a BoP. SRO does it, and whilst it absolutely sucks in SRO events as well, it's at least more understandable - they have a lot of cars to balance, and don't really have a 'rule book' like other series do. ACO has 2 classes to balance, and still can't do it properly.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by gert

I think for a Manufacturer's point of view there are 2 things that are important: Le Mans and the final championship.

I say, le Mans Only.

"World Championship"? There are tons of those. I am sure there is a Frisbee World Championship, and even moerre sure of Ultimate frisbee (my computer is too far from Google so I can't check right now.)

Le Mans, though ... even people who could not care less about "world championship" (it is like the "JD Powers Award" American car companies tout---to all but insiders, it could be the "Kermit the Frog Award,") know what Le Mans means---it is the pinnacle of racing achievement. I am pretty sure if people (except in the US) only know one race it it Le Mans (Indy in the US.)

I think that is why FIA-ACO makes its deals and its stupid rules and had been getting away from it---FIA-ACO Knows it has the prime real estate.

Except, VAG started looking at budgets and RoI and decided, the people who care about racing know that Audi is a force in GT3 and Porsche is big in GTE---and the rest of the people buy because they want to impress their neighbors, and the racing stuff no longer really matters. People buying sedans and SUVs don't care about racing .... so a Le Mans win no longer pays off, at least not like it used to.

Basically, the bean-counters studied sales trends and compared them to racing results, saw no correlation, and said, "Sorry, racing is no longer effective promotion." So VAG Might be back ... but only if it can do the job for a lot less.

I guess other manufacturers have done the same math---building some super-exotic "hypercar" which likely won't move the sales needle but will cost a ton to design, build, prep, and race .... what for?

[Deleted]

http://www.dailysportscar.com/2019/0...published.html

"No significant changes from Test Day"

"-- Again no surprise as the arrangement to do so was clearly telegraphed last year"

?????????? What's that supposed to mean, in one of the more recent Pruett podcasts Graham even said he highly hoped for this artificial stint gap nonsense not to return again. Plus when the abandonment was done last year, nowhere in the DSC article was it hinted that it was due to return
http://www.dailysportscar.com/2018/1...-for-fuji.html

And how is this mandating/penalizing not the headliner of the article, as the other EoT values are clearly trivial in comparison to this

[gert]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I say, le Mans Only.
"World Championship"? There are tons of those.

I understand what you say, but I'm sure it means something to some of the manufacturers at least.

As soon as they could, Porsche put a big logo with the text "Marken 2019 Weltmeister - FIA WEC GT Manufacturers' Champion" on the roof of their WEC cars.

So, it has a logo indicating they won the world championship, not that they won Le Mans last year.

[TF110]

Dumb move but it was to be expected. Why would you have a hybrid if you only go the same distance as a non-hybrid? Gotta be Toyotas logic there... The only thing that helps is that the non-hybrids have a chance to fuel faster if the refueling changes to Toyota has an adverse effect on their refueling time. If they can refuel faster than Toyota, this extra lap will be negated, but that's also dependent on pace which I hope is there. The BR1 doing 350kmh might be a good sign too if they can use it to pass Toyota who were doing 320-330kmh.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by TF110

Dumb move but it was to be expected. Why would you have a hybrid if you only go the same distance as a non-hybrid? Gotta be Toyotas logic there... The only thing that helps is that the non-hybrids have a chance to fuel faster if the refueling changes to Toyota has an adverse effect on their refueling time. If they can refuel faster than Toyota, this extra lap will be negated, but that's also dependent on pace which I hope is there. The BR1 doing 350kmh might be a good sign too if they can use it to pass Toyota who were doing 320-330kmh.

In principal I agree that if you have a superior car/technology/whatever, you should be allowed to be superior, not inferior or even at the same level. Also the nonhybrids never had any chance in pace anyway, regardless of this enforcement, so this changes nothing really in that front... the only way Toyota was/is ever going to lose Le Mans is on reliability or accident damage

HOWEVER it's more of a philosophical and fundamental issue... not only is there artificial performance restricting enforcing of stint lengths, which gives automatic advantage to one party and automatic disadvantage to the other regardless of what they do in the race, but also the party benefiting from this change made it to happen. Not the organizing party, but competitor. That's absurd, Ferrari F1 VETO level or GTE BoP/waiver OEM lobby manipulation levels of absurd.

I remember last year at Spa when Dragonspeed was complaining about stint lengths and being penalized if they were to do more laps per than allowed, and then people came saying it's absolutely not what the rules say and they'd never penalize for overlapping. Until they did at Le Mans...

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by TF110

Dumb move but it was to be expected. Why would you have a hybrid if you only go the same distance as a non-hybrid? Gotta be Toyotas logic there... The only thing that helps is that the non-hybrids have a chance to fuel faster if the refueling changes to Toyota has an adverse effect on their refueling time. If they can refuel faster than Toyota, this extra lap will be negated, but that's also dependent on pace which I hope is there. The BR1 doing 350kmh might be a good sign too if they can use it to pass Toyota who were doing 320-330kmh.

Why would you have a diesel if you only go the same distance as a petrol? They had a significantly smaller fuel tank and slower fuel rate.

--

But anyway, we're full into "let's just make it up as we go along" mode, so whatever. This sort of mess rounds off the Super Season nicely. It won't be remembered fondly.

Originally Posted by Chiana

I remember last year at Spa when Dragonspeed was complaining about stint lengths and being penalized if they were to do more laps per than allowed, and then people came saying it's absolutely not what the rules say and they'd never penalize for overlapping. Until they did at Le Mans...

For what it's worth, some of us absolutely said that. I said it at Spa last year and was told I was wrong. All I did was read the rules as they were written.

[Deleted]

'Making it up as we go' sounds so Lost. Is Lindelof writing the script I wonder

Anyway it's sort of funny:

Success ballast will make the non-LM races crappier, but not LM
Mandated stint advantage/penalty system will make LM crappier, but not non-LM

= SYMBIOSE

Both, of course making the non-LM races 'more exciting' for the pretense of competition, while securing LM success which is the only thing that ever matters anyway

[Deleted]

Another thing that gets overlooked is that even if we dismiss Toyota out of the equation, the mandated stint length also affects inter-nonhybrid competition. Rebellion cannot do better mileage than ART-SMP or Dragonspeed outshine CLM in stints. No, they must all conform to the micro managed numbers.

Also given how much they've neutered back AER in comparison to Zytek recently, I wouldn't be surprised if there was GTE-esque late Friday bulletin after qualifying issuing more BoP (oh I'm sorry, "EoT") penalties for turbocharged

[Deleted]

https://www.autosport.com/wec/news/1...-lmp1-equality

"The gap between us and the others will become closer, especially with SMP I think," Toyota team boss Rob Leupen said.
"Also Rebellion, they are not that far away as they have been last year."
"For me last year it was more about reliability, I don't think you can expect to win Le Mans after a few months with a new car.
"We have seen how difficult it was to win after a few years with a car which has been developed."
"The [privateers] can use more fuel per lap.
"They have the potential to have a lot higher downforce, so they are better in traffic and in the corners. We've not seen it at Spa, but they should have [higher top speeds].
"We should be able to be quicker than them on one lap, but [the difference should be] very tiny.
"With all these compromises we have seen on the EoT side, they will have to come closer."

Sssssssssssssssssuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure

I especially like the lines "compromises" (compromises they could veto) and "they will have to come closer". Why will they have to come closer?

Nonhybrids being "better in traffic and corners" also makes no sense to me, other than in PR excuses sense

[canaglia]

hard to predict, SMP and rebellion at their best could be in 3.18; toyotas a couple of seconds faster, anyway qualifying sessions basically don't mean a thing afterall.
Hybrid boost and better acceleration in traffic will make toyotas unreachable anyway after 20 minutes.



Aside that, what time AER engines will blow during the race?

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by canaglia

hard to predict, SMP and rebellion at their best could be in 3.18; toyotas a couple of seconds faster, anyway qualifying sessions basically don't mean a thing afterall.
Hybrid boost and better acceleration in traffic will make toyotas unreachable anyway after 20 minutes.



Aside that, what time AER engines will blow during the race?

Unreachable 20 minutes? More like the second lap I reckon

Anyway the first AER will gloriously explode 4AM sunday morning at Mulsanne, with safety car required in moving the car. The second car won't burst any flames but will get stuck in the garage throughout the second part of the race because of continuing "engine warning signals", ultimately leading to retirement at 11AM

In all seriousness, I would like to say that as much as we make fun of the likes of AER, and say ByKolles, these are the _colors_ of the race. The absolute spirits of Le Mans. When you have a field of clone spec cars (LMP2) or performance balanced show machinery (GTE), there isn't really going to be much of "what's going to happen to them" factor... because they're all the same conveyor belt material.

[canaglia]

you know... I just think as happened in 2017, both toyotas will go for a quick time attack as soon Q sessions start. Once got a reasonable safe timelap for 1st and 2nd, guess they will just spend the remaining time for short/long tyres, aero settings, fuel tank simulations. That's why even if SMP and rebellion will get close qualifying laps, it actually won't mean a thing....


Once started the race, guess toyotas will build a safe 10-15 seconds gap in first 20 minutes. Once started GTE overlapping, game over for SMP and rebellion; thanks for playing.

The only ace in the hole for rebellion is their gibson reliability..... soon or later AER will strikes back, while toyotas could however suffer of hybrid hardware issue....