[WEC] LMP Future Regulations (was Le Mans EVO rules - now hypercar rules)

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Lorenzo S

Unless I've missed it, no one seems to have posted a link to the ACO's actual presentation press release for the 2014 rules proposals. So, here it is:

ACO Tech Regs 2014

You missed it

[Lorenzo S]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

You missed it

Ooops. So I did. Never mind, I thought it was so exciting it was worth repeating...

[cdsvg]

Originally Posted by henk4

one of the main assumptions of the new rules is that speeds/laptimes as they are now, will be maintained. ACO has estimated exact volumes of fuel that they think will be required to complete such laps under such conditions. Time will tell whether they were right. Knowing the innovative and clever engineers that are around these days, I would not be surprised if the currently estimated fuel requirements will prove to be lower than actually needed in order to maintain the current speeds.

But X L per kilometer at LM is different to X L per kilometer at Sebring. They could set different limits for each track, but that sounds tricky at best.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by cdsvg

But X L per kilometer at LM is different to X L per kilometer at Sebring. They could set different limits for each track, but that sounds tricky at best.

It has been done before, so it can be done again.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by cdsvg

But X L per kilometer at LM is different to X L per kilometer at Sebring. They could set different limits for each track, but that sounds tricky at best.

Le Mans being the most thirsty track, as was established here a couple of days ago, will determine the set-up of the engine management. So, hopefully, all cars will run the same set up on each track. All other tracks will not be subject to fuel amount restrictions as during the Group C times, so we might see proper racing also there.

[gucom]

do I understand the drawings correctly that there will be BHH's both on top of the fenders and on the insides of the fenders? I thought it was gonna be insides only?

[Spyderman]

Don't worry. I find the drawing quite confusing as well.

[Lorenzo S]

Why are they still insisting on these ugly great holes (and fins) anyway? I was vainly hoping the new regs were going to eliminate these ugly features. That was certainly what the ACO was intimating a while back.

What if the bodywork is high enough between the wheels to prevent these holes or are we doomed to have F1 style pointy monocoques forever?

[alexkiller8]

i think that engines will must to respect just the LM consumes mandatory, the same set-up will be used for all the other tracks too.

About holes and fins, holes in my opinion are useless if we talk about safety and just add some drag, that is however counterbalanced by the aero development (ts030 and r18 ultra could however reach 330km/h and an oreca 03 during the race touched 320km/h). Fin is maybe usefull at not so high speed, but become useless in high speed crash when air get under the car and the car goes airbone...

[lms]

Originally Posted by Lorenzo S

Why are they still insisting on these ugly great holes (and fins) anyway? I was vainly hoping the new regs were going to eliminate these ugly features.

it seems this is the best they can come up with.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by gucom

do I understand the drawings correctly that there will be BHH's both on top of the fenders and on the insides of the fenders? I thought it was gonna be insides only?

I believe manufacturers are given the option for hole placement on top or inside the wheel arches in 2014.

[Articus]

Originally Posted by joeb

I believe manufacturers are given the option for hole placement on top or inside the wheel arches in 2014.

Thats really interesting because the Audi R18 already has holes there for the wheels iirc. They saw no need to close it with the bodywork already above it.

Also Toyota had this going with the GT-One where there was the hole on the side of the wheel arch. Not sure if they were big enough though.

Wouldnt a hole in the side breach the regulation of not being able to see any mechanical components in this cae like the suspension arms, brake.

[Articus]

What potential other privateer chassis builders could exit in 2014? If Lola does not make it alot of teams are out of luck. Hopefully we get a constructor that builds something with good out of the box performance. I know Lola's aren't that quick.

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Articus

I know Lola's aren't that quick.

They were quick enough to be the highest placed non Audi at Le Mans this year.

[Deleted]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

They were quick enough to be the highest placed non Audi at Le Mans this year.

Or in other words, the only petrol car without reliability issues...

[Lasse]

Originally Posted by Chiana

Or in other words, the only petrol car without reliability issues...

Which is a pretty big part of Le Mans no?

[Deleted]

Never said it wasn't, but I would've loved to have seen a bit bgger counter attack from the opposition as now it just literally was about last man standing... even that old grandfathered dinosaur of Pesca's 01 gave more of a fight for Rebellion than HPDs and co this year

[gwyllion]

Deggis posted an article in the Toyota TS030, in which Yoshiaki Kinoshlta expressed that he was very unhappy with the 2014 rules.

I found another article which explains why Toyota believes that the rules unfair for petrol engines.

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 Kinoshlta.

"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."

Simply put, Murata says he wants the efficiency targets in endurance races like Le Mans.

When asked whether he would commit to Toyota being in the 2014 Le Mans without further negotiations over fuel efficiency, Kinoshlta-san was steadfast: "No, I cannot [commit]. What I need is not to benefit for Toyota, but fair technical regulations."

He explained that he wanted the diesel bar raised, not the petrol bar lowered.

So Toyota may have a tough decision ahead. Does it choose World Rally Championship or Le Mans 24-Hour?

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

[alexkiller8]

is hard to understand... toyota is one of leading manufacter in hybrid technology, i believed that they could be happy of new regulamentation! because of limited consumes, toyota can show how to build a powerfull engine with limited consumes because of an excellent hybrid system. If toyota isn't happy because of the old diesel/petrol question, well, i think that the only reply that audi can give is: are you not happy? power your car with a diesel engine.

[Deleted]

The problem is that not everyone wants to market diesel. ACO missed a good opportunity now that the regs are changing... they could've just banned diesel altogether, the equivalence is never fair anyway and Audi has made their point.

The revival of fuel formula isn't really the same as it was in Group C.

[gwyllion]

As a reminder, the following table highlights how much every drive train configuration must be improved in efficiency in order to comply with the targeted fuel allocation.


The reduction in fuel consumption supposedly needs to be bigger for diesel engines (-24%) than for petrol engines (-19%).

In 2012 Audi already improved the fuel consumption for the R18 significantly (10% according to the Audi facts). So the numbers in the table are already outdated: the R18 ultra did 12 laps with 60 liter during the complete 24 hours, so that means 5 liter/lap, whereas the table states 5.26 liter/lap.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

As a reminder, the following table highlights how much every drive train configuration must be improved in efficiency in order to comply with the targeted fuel allocation.

The reduction in fuel consumption supposedly needs to be bigger for diesel engines (-24%) than for petrol engines (-19%).

In 2012 Audi already improved the fuel consumption for the R18 significantly (10% according to the Audi facts). So the numbers in the table are already outdated: the R18 ultra did 12 laps with 60 liter during the complete 24 hours, so that means 5 liter/lap, whereas the table states 5.26 liter/lap.

Hence Toyota being upset with the 2014 regs. I see this as a big issue as well.

[TF110]

That's exactly why Toyota is 'complaining'. The target set for the diesels aren't hard at all, but the target set for petrols is without reach (well, within reach, but not to be competitive). I'm sure they'll go back and talk more about the rules. ACO wouldn't be very wise to turn off someone like Toyota who probably have the most knowledge about hybrid power. That goes to say if they aren't happy, what makes anyone think another (non-diesel) manufacturer would be?

[deggis]

If similar unhappy comments do not come from Stuttgart soon, I'm going to start preparing mentally for them coming out with a diesel.

[chewymonster]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Deggis posted an article in the Toyota TS030, in which Yoshiaki Kinoshlta expressed that he was very unhappy with the 2014 rules.

I found another article which explains why Toyota believes that the rules unfair for petrol engines.
source: http://www.motoring.com.au/news/2012...k-to-wrc-30907

I think it's all smoke and mirrors. If you take his numbers than the rules are exactly spot on as a diesel with a 42.5% peak efficiency is thus inherently 11.8% more efficient than a gasoline engine that at its peak is 38% energy efficient. If you look at the fuel flow limits gasoline engines are allowed 22% more fuel flow which accounts for a diesel having 10% more energy per each liter.

However I think his numbers for his own engine are overstated as 38% efficiency is higher than a direct injected gasoline turbo or even an atkinson cycle (like on the Prius) gasoline engine. Likewise 45% peak efficiency for a passenger/ high rev diesel is equally impossible as he wants the 2014 P1 disel to be more efficient than semi truck diesels that only rev to a little over 2,000 RPM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_s..._shaft_engines

PS just read the full article and there are like 20 mentions of Toyota "negotiating" to write the WRC rules to their liking/advantage and marketing desires which is exactly what the Le Mans comments sound like.