Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed

Poll: F1 or LMP1: Which would win a 1000km race?

Total Members Polled: 77

F1:
40%
LMP1:
60%
2
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

Jungles

Original Poster:

3,581 posts

105 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
If you pitched the fastest of the F1 cars (say, Brawn and RBR) against the fastest LMP1 cars (Audi and Peugeot) in a 1000km race under current technical regulations and driver line-ups, which would win?

F1 cars are tuned for maximum 2 hours or 300km, while LMP1 cars are required to run at least 1000km and up to 24 hours. Presumably, F1 cars will need to reduce maximum rpm of their engines and refuel more often, but they could still run faster in terms of lap times.

Could F1 cars be adapted for 1000km races under present technical regulations, and how would such adaptations fare against LMP1 cars?

Let's assume the track is Spa in summer dry.

To extend the scenario, how about 12 hour races? 24 hours? I'd guess that F1 cars won't last for 24 hours, although they might gasp to the finish at the 12th hour.

TVR Moneypit

16,312 posts

95 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
I'm far from an expert, but I'd say that F1 would win at 1000km's, anything over that and it would be LMP1.

just don't ask me to back up that assumption with reason or fact, ok?

Gazboy

49,812 posts

135 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

Hamilton's pole was 1.47.338 for 2008, compares to 2.01.056 for the Peugoet's 2009 qualifying time so it wouldn't take long for the F1 cars to have enough in hand to pit and get out infront. The driver changes would take a while though.

dafeller

418 posts

74 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
What else on an F1 car lasts for three races? I would have to think that they get all new brakes for each race, and it wouldn't surprise me if suspension bearings, etc., all get replaced as well. Transmissions seem to be very fragile as well; let's not even discuss bodywork that gets strewn all over the circuit each race.

One of the reasons that LMP1 cars weigh more is that parts made to last 24 hours are pretty stout devices, and they carry on the average ten (diesel) to twenty (diesel) more litres of fuel.

In 2007 BMW had Nick Heidfeld lap the Nordschlieffe in the F1 car and, depending on who was watching, his lap time was not well estimated, as there was some PR showboating going on. His official time was around 2 minutes slower than Stefan Bellof's epic record of 6:11. Others estimated that without the mugging for the camera, he was around the record, and the factory estimates the F1 car would get into the sub-six minute bracket if driven hard for a full lap. There's no question the F1 car is faster, just an issue of if it could last, how pit stops would affect overall time, how much the driver could take. That alone could be fun-getting a driver out of an F1 car and a new driver in would take about ten minutes, looking at the packaging.

profstoff

1,272 posts

111 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Gazboy said:
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

But how tired is the engine after three weekends and there is some suggestion that teams are using one engine for Friday's, keeping the qualy and race engine fresher.

As has been said before, other components are changed every race.

F1 tyres last a third of a GP, much less time than sports car tyres so they would have to change more often or use more durable rubber and accept the slower lap time.

Brakes are another factor, sports cars change pads and discs during a race and are designed to do so, F1 cars aren't.

It's a no-brainer for me, sports cars are designed for endurance racing so will be quicker over a long distance. F1 cars are designed for sprints and will be quickest over a short distance. If you wanted to run an F1 car for 1000 kms, you would have to design it to do so and then end up with all the compromises that go along with that.


Edited by profstoff on Friday 12th June 08:18

Advertisement

Scuffers

13,648 posts

158 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
profstoff said:
Gazboy said:
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

But how tired is the engine after three weekends and there is some suggestion that teams are using one engine for Friday's, keeping the qualy and race engine fresher.
I *think* Braun are only on their second engine in Buttons car?

profstoff

1,272 posts

111 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Scuffers said:
profstoff said:
Gazboy said:
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

But how tired is the engine after three weekends and there is some suggestion that teams are using one engine for Friday's, keeping the qualy and race engine fresher.
I *think* Braun are only on their second engine in Buttons car?
According to this ( http://www.pitlanefanatic.com/engine.php ) they used the fourth in Turkey.

stifler

37,053 posts

72 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Gazboy said:
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

Hamilton's pole was 1.47.338 for 2008, compares to 2.01.056 for the Peugoet's 2009 qualifying time so it wouldn't take long for the F1 cars to have enough in hand to pit and get out infront. The driver changes would take a while though.
So they have just under 14 seconds a lap advantage, two laps and that is a pitstop distance apart. if they did a 20 lap stint they would have 300 seconds or 5 minutes advantage. With this advantage they could stop halfway through the race and do a full spanner check and prep of the cars.

Component lifeing would come into things by this stage though.


The F1 car would walk it.

crofty1984

10,353 posts

88 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
stifler said:
Gazboy said:
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

Hamilton's pole was 1.47.338 for 2008, compares to 2.01.056 for the Peugoet's 2009 qualifying time so it wouldn't take long for the F1 cars to have enough in hand to pit and get out infront. The driver changes would take a while though.
So they have just under 14 seconds a lap advantage, two laps and that is a pitstop distance apart. if they did a 20 lap stint they would have 300 seconds or 5 minutes advantage. With this advantage they could stop halfway through the race and do a full spanner check and prep of the cars.

Component lifeing would come into things by this stage though.


The F1 car would walk it.
Time for a wee as well.

SamHH

4,776 posts

100 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
profstoff said:
If you wanted to run an F1 car for 1000 kms, you would have to design it to do so and then end up with all the compromises that go along with that.
I think that's what Jungles was asking: if you adapted an F1 car under the current F1 regulations, would it be faster than an LMP1 car under the current LMP1 regulations?

Ahonen

3,748 posts

163 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Hmm. If we were allowed to derestrict and take the ballast out of the sportscar it might be a bit closer - say by another 4 or 5 seconds a lap. The weight and downforce differences between the two genres are so massive you'd never get near an F1 car.

I don't think the driver changes would be terribly fast in an F1 car, though...

Over 1000km a current F1 car would walk it, but to design an F1 car to do 24 hours would mean some pretty serious compromises.

Sportscars are faster than Indycars though on raw pace these days.

Jungles

Original Poster:

3,581 posts

105 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
SamHH said:
profstoff said:
If you wanted to run an F1 car for 1000 kms, you would have to design it to do so and then end up with all the compromises that go along with that.
I think that's what Jungles was asking: if you adapted an F1 car under the current F1 regulations, would it be faster than an LMP1 car under the current LMP1 regulations?
Yup. Within the current technical regulations for F1, how much could be modified to make it viable for a 1000km race? And how much of a speed penalty would result? Would an F1 car be as slow as an LMP1 if it used detuned engines, harder brake pad materials, etc.? Would an F1 car even make it to the finish?

My view is that you could use harder brake pad materials, detune the engine to around 17500rpm, but that would be about it. I think even if you could expand the fuel tanks within the BGP001 or RBR5, it wouldn't be as large as the tanks in the Audi R15 or Peugeot 906. Then there is the issue of drive-train longevity and tyre life: F1 loses out on both, especially tyres. All added up, I think the competition would be close, but an LMP1 will scrape a win over 1000km. F1 cars will need to pit at least twice as often as LMP1, more like three times as often, and then there are driver changes too.

Edited by Jungles on Friday 12th June 10:29

SamHH

4,776 posts

100 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Jungles said:
Then there is the issue of drive-train longevity and tyre life: F1 loses out on both, especially tyres.
Do the regulations prohibit longer-lasting drive trains and tyres? I wouldn't have thought so.

Jungles

Original Poster:

3,581 posts

105 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Good point that. But how much more robust could an F1 team make its gearbox and other drive-train components? I would have thought they're already as robust as they can make them.

F1 uses control tyres. So you can't change that.

Edited by Jungles on Friday 12th June 10:36

FourWheelDrift

61,120 posts

168 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
dafeller said:
What else on an F1 car lasts for three races? I would have to think that they get all new brakes for each race, and it wouldn't surprise me if suspension bearings, etc., all get replaced as well. Transmissions seem to be very fragile as well; let's not even discuss bodywork that gets strewn all over the circuit each race.

One of the reasons that LMP1 cars weigh more is that parts made to last 24 hours are pretty stout devices, and they carry on the average ten (diesel) to twenty (diesel) more litres of fuel.
They do change parts on LMP1/LMP2 cars during race, such as brakes. Gearboxes in F1 have the same need to last more than one race like the engines do now.

The LMP1 cars have a restricted fuel capacity of 90litres (81litres for diesel) the tank on an F1 car is not restricted, it can be a big as they want. If any F1 car can one stop in a race then the tank will be at least 100litres.

SamHH

4,776 posts

100 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
Jungles said:
Good point that. But how much more robust could an F1 team make its gearbox and other drive-train components? I would have thought they're already as robust as they can make them.
Really? I would have thought that they are absolutely as un-robust as they can get away with.

stifler

37,053 posts

72 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
crofty1984 said:
stifler said:
Gazboy said:
One of the 8 engines in F1 will have to do 3 weekends, which I think is around 900km in total.

Hamilton's pole was 1.47.338 for 2008, compares to 2.01.056 for the Peugoet's 2009 qualifying time so it wouldn't take long for the F1 cars to have enough in hand to pit and get out infront. The driver changes would take a while though.
So they have just under 14 seconds a lap advantage, two laps and that is a pitstop distance apart. if they did a 20 lap stint they would have 300 seconds or 5 minutes advantage. With this advantage they could stop halfway through the race and do a full spanner check and prep of the cars.

Component lifeing would come into things by this stage though.


The F1 car would walk it.
Time for a wee as well.
And a Magnum!

bales

1,905 posts

102 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
SamHH said:
Jungles said:
Good point that. But how much more robust could an F1 team make its gearbox and other drive-train components? I would have thought they're already as robust as they can make them.
Really? I would have thought that they are absolutely as un-robust as they can get away with.
Exactly what I was thinking, why would you design something to me more robust than it needed to be!

Similar vein to the qualifying engines in the earlier turbo era engines, they build them to do the job they need to and if that happens to be 1 race, 2 races or 3 races or whatever, thats what they will be designed to do or 'just' do is a better phrase.

stifler

37,053 posts

72 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
I'm surprised at the percentage. People haven't thought it through!! wink

Andy M

3,295 posts

143 months

[news] 
Friday 12th June 2009 quote quote all
I hugely doubt an F1 car could complete 1,000km in one go. That is, unless they turned the revs down, but then would it be much faster than the LM car?
2
Reply to Topic