Mazda #55 on fire and no fire extinguishers...

[racerxf12004]

I could not believe how long #55 was sitting there burning....if a driver was trapped in that car, there would have been a tragic outcome...

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by racerxf12004

I could not believe how long #55 was sitting there burning....if a driver was trapped in that car, there would have been a tragic outcome...

And if it was magnesium it would have exploded in a fireball? He wasn't trapped and pulled off track. It wasn't a wreck that caused the fire and the car wasn't immediately withdrawn from the race so the fuss is because??

[joeb]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

And if it was magnesium it would have exploded in a fireball? He wasn't trapped and pulled off track. It wasn't a wreck that caused the fire and the car wasn't immediately withdrawn from the race so the fuss is because??

There driver didn't know where the fire suppression system was, or it malfunctioned. Both of those things are problematic. Although probably not as problematic as the car constantly catching fire. LOL

[fieldodreams79]

My guess is that they were surprised to see a Mazda on fire..



wait, no, that can't be the answer...

[broadrun96]

They fixed the problems so they removed the fire suppression in favor of more oil for the turbo. More oil means they'll dissipate the heat better and no fire?

[Coach Ep]

It was cold, Mazda tried to warm everyone up!

[joeb]

A little article on Mazda's day. Not flattering.

https://autoweek.com/article/imsa/an...n=awdailydrive

[skycafe]

Originally Posted by joeb

A little article on Mazda's day. Not flattering.

https://autoweek.com/article/imsa/an...n=awdailydrive

Ouch! But, at this point it would be difficult to spin positive.

There is a clip on FaceBook of the 77 car stopped at the chicane, Bernhard leaning into the cockpit and fidgeting around in a panic, the large "MAZDA" lettering on the BHF is illuminated by the trackside lighting, but also the flames flickering out of the exhaust area. That is a pretty sad image, and it will get more play then Pole Position did.

Maybe it is all too much thinking out of the box?.

[Coach Ep]

Originally Posted by joeb

A little article on Mazda's day. Not flattering.

https://autoweek.com/article/imsa/an...n=awdailydrive

You'll have to admire Mazda's and Doohan's determination to get the car to victory circle. The project has many parallels with Toyota's LM obsession - one they were finally put to rest last year. We will see Mazda in victory circle this year, last years races at Sebring and Laguna Seca especially showed they have the potential. It's only a matter of time before that potential is converted, sometimes it just takes longer than anticipated. No need to shoot them down or openly question if they will be back next year (like the article at some point suggests).

Determination, persistence, hard work and professionalism has always paid off - it will again for Mazda.

[Maelochs]

"sometimes it just takes longer than anticipated"?

I was a big Mazda fan back when SpeedSource was actually winning in Mazdas. I was intrigued when Mazda won the special Diesel class. I was excited when Mazda moved to prototypes. It's been what, six years?

The diesel was a nice idea, but Nice ideas rarely finish, apparently. The AER unit was overworked and uncompetitive in the Dyson Lola and everywhere else, it seems. With the latest set of upgrades .... the engines burns as well as all the previous iterations.

Sometimes determination, persistence, hard work, and professionalism (which has not always been on display in some of the pit work) are not enough. Sometimes a flawed design cannot be overcome.

Ford had the GT, the GT Mark II, and the GT Mark IV ... and also the J-car and the F3L. "Professionalism" included walking away from the stuff that didn't work.

Maybe Mazda will succeed---or maybe the lack of torque will always kill the car in traffic or in heads-up duels with its competitors. Maybe the engine will finally be reliable, despite being pushed to ever-higher limits----or maybe we will see another season of near misses when the car burns down while leading or hunting for the lead int he final laps ... or much sooner.

When the mere mention of your car elicits images of barbecues and camp fires, when people ask what happened and the answer "It's Mazda" and no one asks further ....

They have the potential (particularly at long races) and I would love to see them convert. What I have seen is late-race failure, or mid-race failure, and usually flame shooting out of the engine compartment.

There is no guarantee that they will realize their "potential" just through persistence.

They got two cars on the podium at Petit last year. I don't think they could have won, and the AXR #5's fuel shortage helped ... but they finished near the front (5 and 7 seconds off.) Can the "new, improved" engine survive a long race? it's possible.

However ... five years to hit the podium?

Methinks Mazda might want to give the program a little more cash and maybe work on a better engine design? it seems likely that with the current torque deficit (not to mention the utter unreliability) that the car will win based more on luck than anything else.

If the car had a decent engine I think they'd have won long ago.

I have no idea whether Mazda's withdrawal form most racing means the corporation wants to focus on a few, winning efforts, or plans to scale back further. But at some point "still knocking on the door" becomes "still banging one's head against the wall."

If Mazda is really "obsessed" with IMSA success ... they might need to deepen that obsession. Admiring persistence is fine ... but if their goal is to be admired for success, they might want to look at a blank sheet of paper.

[TF110]

They need to drop the AER engine. It's not as simple as that, but imo, that's the biggest and should be the first step.

[HopAlong]

I don't think much is wrong with the AER on the power front, their 4.0 V8 P1 engine was more than a match for the diesels, the new P1 V6 was better than the others for power and so was the 2.0 4cyl. I'm just shocked how its been the same issues for years. I was watching the 2009 Sebring 12 Hours on YouTube and sure enough both P1 AER teams had retired after an hour and a half, then 2-3 hours in, both Dyson Mazdas went pop.

Is the engine a new design or is it still related to the early 2000s 675/P2 motor?

[skycafe]

It is a bespoke design https://www.aerltd.com/our-engines/p...gle-turbo-2.0/

[joeb]

Originally Posted by HopAlong

I don't think much is wrong with the AER on the power front, their 4.0 V8 P1 engine was more than a match for the diesels, the new P1 V6 was better than the others for power and so was the 2.0 4cyl. I'm just shocked how its been the same issues for years. I was watching the 2009 Sebring 12 Hours on YouTube and sure enough both P1 AER teams had retired after an hour and a half, then 2-3 hours in, both Dyson Mazdas went pop.

Is the engine a new design or is it still related to the early 2000s 675/P2 motor?

Originally Posted by skycafe

It is a bespoke design https://www.aerltd.com/our-engines/p...gle-turbo-2.0/

AER also make a turbo 4 cylinder engine for the Indy Lights series, it has less power than the Mazda, but they don't have any issues with the motor going boom. Would be interesting to see what exactly has failed in the Mazda during each engine blow. Is it the same component? or are there always new surprises?

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by HopAlong

I don't think much is wrong with the AER on the power front, their 4.0 V8 P1 engine was more than a match for the diesels, the new P1 V6 was better than the others for power and so was the 2.0 4cyl. I'm just shocked how its been the same issues for years. I was watching the 2009 Sebring 12 Hours on YouTube and sure enough both P1 AER teams had retired after an hour and a half, then 2-3 hours in, both Dyson Mazdas went pop.

Is the engine a new design or is it still related to the early 2000s 675/P2 motor?

I agree AER engines don't lack of power, in fact the updated 2L mazda is using this season should be the one with the highest power output considering the high top speed marked by a dramatically high drag designed car forced to use high downforce setting by bop too.
Unfortunately any of theese engines ever lasted 24 hours as far I know. That's simple.


Guess that for a small 2L engine is quite hard to endure to about 2.5bar relentless turbo pressure... infact peugeot 908HDi turbodiesel engines were in that range of turbo boost but were 5.5L.
Make the engine with more robust parts and increase displacement to 2.4L should help to improve reliability and overall performances.

But guess AER makes engine to have a profit, in that case engine would be too expensive to produce.

[Deleted]

One of the best recent quotes regarding AER comes from a rival
https://www.motorsport.com/wec/news/...-snub/3154793/

"An engine which has been developed for years, yet failed to finish at Le Mans in June".

(it's not entirely true but pretty accurate, even the AERs that have 'finished' have finished poorly)

[Maelochs]

I have posted a lengthy defense of AER elsewhere and don't need to do it again. AER makes fine motors. However ... the IMSA version, or the three (or is it four?) versions which have run ALMS/IMSA (starting with the MZR, I think) have never provided both power and reliability sufficient to make the cars competitive.

While not every Mazda loss or retirement can be laid at the feet of the AER engine ... quite a few can. And it will never have the torque of its rivals, which means it will always lose a head-to-head duel, .... can't handle traffic, or slower corners, as well as the bigger motors.

I agree with canaglia ... the motor needs a clean-sheet redesign and significant displacement boost.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I have posted a lengthy defense of AER elsewhere and don't need to do it again. AER makes fine motors. However ... the IMSA version, or the three (or is it four?) versions which have run ALMS/IMSA (starting with the MZR, I think) have never provided both power and reliability sufficient to make the cars competitive.

While not every Mazda loss or retirement can be laid at the feet of the AER engine ... quite a few can. And it will never have the torque of its rivals, which means it will always lose a head-to-head duel, .... can't handle traffic, or slower corners, as well as the bigger motors.

I agree with canaglia ... the motor needs a clean-sheet redesign and significant displacement boost.

Originally Posted by joeb

AER also make a turbo 4 cylinder engine for the Indy Lights series, it has less power than the Mazda, but they don't have any issues with the motor going boom. Would be interesting to see what exactly has failed in the Mazda during each engine blow. Is it the same component? or are there always new surprises?

Exactly what Maelochs says, AER makes great products for most engines and appears to make season long durable engines. The Indy Lights engine is 2.0L with less power and torque but has to make it all season. Their GP3 (Project 57) engine makes slightly less again and it's almost twice the size but again is designed to make it all season. It just seems to scream 2.0L just isn't going to work for their needs and all evidence leans toward the age old adage about displacement.

[Turbodcc]

Originally Posted by HopAlong

I don't think much is wrong with the AER on the power front, their 4.0 V8 P1 engine was more than a match for the diesels, the new P1 V6 was better than the others for power and so was the 2.0 4cyl. I'm just shocked how its been the same issues for years. I was watching the 2009 Sebring 12 Hours on YouTube and sure enough both P1 AER teams had retired after an hour and a half, then 2-3 hours in, both Dyson Mazdas went pop.

Is the engine a new design or is it still related to the early 2000s 675/P2 motor?

not sure on the design being honest. But reading the few articles that have come out over the years it looks like the last two years have seen big changes at the company, between new bosses etc.. They had said its been an iteration of the previous or something with a rev increase.

My two cents would be this, AER look like they have motors much more suited to the IMSA power requirements. That P60 V6 looks good for easily getting at least some more torque.

For me this comes down to Mazda. Mazda want the I4, that much is clear. How many years has it been? An zero input from factory? Why would AER want to continue to race an I4 2litre motor that is required to run so much harder than the competition???

I mean look at the BOP for Daytona! they are the lightest car at 905kg, smallest capacity by miles, highest revving by miles, lowest air/fuel ratio, second highest fuel capacity!

Im no expert on the matter, would like if some of the tech heads on here could comment, but the 5.5litre caddy is using a 70litre tank! 2l mazda on 79litres..... What sort of dame power are they having to pull out of that poor motor!??? An the caddy, granted with ex F1 drivers in some cases, looks faster.

No way AER, having a LMP1 WEC engine that supposedly runs very lean would be pushing to run those numbers if they had the choice.

As for the car itself, well I know Multimatic got involved heavily this year, and maybe homologation rules are stopping them, but surely the car cant be as good as the rest.

[Turbodcc]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

I have posted a lengthy defense of AER elsewhere and don't need to do it again. AER makes fine motors. However ... the IMSA version, or the three (or is it four?) versions which have run ALMS/IMSA (starting with the MZR, I think) have never provided both power and reliability sufficient to make the cars competitive.

While not every Mazda loss or retirement can be laid at the feet of the AER engine ... quite a few can. And it will never have the torque of its rivals, which means it will always lose a head-to-head duel, .... can't handle traffic, or slower corners, as well as the bigger motors.

I agree with canaglia ... the motor needs a clean-sheet redesign and significant displacement boost.

Exactly, its needs a re-design. It probably is possible to make it work with all the technical advances since the beginning of the project many years ago. But that would take many months to do, and probably even more for the small AER company along with their other projects. Like my comment above, I think this just says how little Mazda must be willing to throw at it in a single season.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by Turbodcc

not sure on the design being honest. But reading the few articles that have come out over the years it looks like the last two years have seen big changes at the company, between new bosses etc.. They had said its been an iteration of the previous or something with a rev increase.

My two cents would be this, AER look like they have motors much more suited to the IMSA power requirements. That P60 V6 looks good for easily getting at least some more torque.

For me this comes down to Mazda. Mazda want the I4, that much is clear. How many years has it been? An zero input from factory? Why would AER want to continue to race an I4 2litre motor that is required to run so much harder than the competition???

I mean look at the BOP for Daytona! they are the lightest car at 905kg, smallest capacity by miles, highest revving by miles, lowest air/fuel ratio, second highest fuel capacity!

Im no expert on the matter, would like if some of the tech heads on here could comment, but the 5.5litre caddy is using a 70litre tank! 2l mazda on 79litres..... What sort of dame power are they having to pull out of that poor motor!??? An the caddy, granted with ex F1 drivers in some cases, looks faster.

No way AER, having a LMP1 WEC engine that supposedly runs very lean would be pushing to run those numbers if they had the choice.

As for the car itself, well I know Multimatic got involved heavily this year, and maybe homologation rules are stopping them, but surely the car cant be as good as the rest.

well you need to consider that 2L mazda has about 2.4-2.5bar for the whole rpm range, basically it's just like if it was a NA 5L.
Aside that, the answer is simple.... GM 5.5 has a 7600rpm revlimiter but likely drivers upshift below 7000rpm because of the excess of torque; while, as shown by jarvis onboard, mazda drivers need to catch up to 9000rpm to reach the top power.
A smaller engine has worse consumes because has to rev higher to reach a X power that a larger engine reaches at lower rpm's.
It basically work the same way with street cars.

Recall 2017 season, GM 6.2 had better fuel miliage than anyone else with a 64L fuel tank lol (courtesy also of bopped low downforce rear wing and longer gear ratios).

Despite everything, I'm quite sure that mazda 2L pushes not less than 620hp, considering that reached 312km/h (194mph) before bus stop even though a mandatory HD aero setting and a natural high drag design.

[S griffin]

I think Mazda have a good chance, but it all depends with how the car performs in different circuits. Really we have a good mix this season

The different classes have helped. It does work. I think the series has done well the last few years

[Turbodcc]

Originally Posted by canaglia

well you need to consider that 2L mazda has about 2.4-2.5bar for the whole rpm range, basically it's just like if it was a NA 5L.
Aside that, the answer is simple.... GM 5.5 has a 7600rpm revlimiter but likely drivers upshift below 7000rpm because of the excess of torque; while, as shown by jarvis onboard, mazda drivers need to catch up to 9000rpm to reach the top power.
A smaller engine has worse consumes because has to rev higher to reach a X power that a larger engine reaches at lower rpm's.
It basically work the same way with street cars.

Recall 2017 season, GM 6.2 had better fuel miliage than anyone else with a 64L fuel tank lol (courtesy also of bopped low downforce rear wing and longer gear ratios).

Despite everything, I'm quite sure that mazda 2L pushes not less than 620hp, considering that reached 312km/h (194mph) before bus stop even though a mandatory HD aero setting and a natural high drag design.

Thanks for that @canaglia! I was hoping you would see it. I have to say, I think the mazda is pushing closer to 650-700hp.

[canaglia]

Originally Posted by Turbodcc

Thanks for that @canaglia! I was hoping you would see it. I have to say, I think the mazda is pushing closer to 650-700hp.

No way
only state of art Porsche 2L V4 and lexus/honda GT500 2L engines can achieve >650hp with >90kg/h fuel flow rate, but the latters aren't endurance designed engines, while just porsche motor would costs x4 whole mazda dpi.

AER mazda is an old designed engine, season by season pushed over the edge. Guess it pushes about 620hp just because it revs over 9300rpm, recall last seasons revlimit was set at about 8600-8800rpm and likely didn't reach 600hp at all.

[S griffin]

Well I guess we’ll see the Porsches will have it’s own advantages and disadvantages and thank to IMSA’s rules it will be close.

Mazda will probably be up there again