Le Mans regulations, next year. *spoilers from this year*
Discussion
I'll admit right from the start that I'm an F1 fan and pay scant regard to sports car racing so apologies for any balls I'm about to talk....
Anyway, when Audi first starting taking a tractor engined car to Le Mans, the governing body (who I gather ISN'T the FIA?) of the race, were unsure how to work the regulations to make neither petrol nor diesel cars have any massive advantage. They got it a bit wrong and Audis derv machines simply sprinted away from the rest of the field for the next X years. There was much outcry from the petrol manufacturers and the governing body said they'd equalise the two technologies.... But then Pug got involved. French race, French manufacturer, there'll be no levelling of this playing field until Pug gets a good race win under their belts?
Is that on the right line?
So, now Pug have got their win, will we see the playing field levelled off a bit to allow the petrol engined cars to once again compete on equal terms with the blight that is diseasel?
Anyway, when Audi first starting taking a tractor engined car to Le Mans, the governing body (who I gather ISN'T the FIA?) of the race, were unsure how to work the regulations to make neither petrol nor diesel cars have any massive advantage. They got it a bit wrong and Audis derv machines simply sprinted away from the rest of the field for the next X years. There was much outcry from the petrol manufacturers and the governing body said they'd equalise the two technologies.... But then Pug got involved. French race, French manufacturer, there'll be no levelling of this playing field until Pug gets a good race win under their belts?
Is that on the right line?
So, now Pug have got their win, will we see the playing field levelled off a bit to allow the petrol engined cars to once again compete on equal terms with the blight that is diseasel?
As I understand it the diesel succeeded because they required fewer fuel stops (and hence less time wasted) rather than on outright power, but I may be wrong. In any case I think that artificially tinkering with the regs to allow one or other to win is wrong and as much as it grieves me to say it, if a diesel can be made to give more power to weight than a petrol and win races on equal footing then so be it.
Yes, the Le Mans 24 Hours is governed by the Automobile Club de l'Ouest, not the FIA. Given the nature of the technical regulations, with various different technologies and techniques being allowing to compete against each other with a system of equivalence handicaps, there is always going to be controversy about whether one technology or technique has an unfair advantage. Some see the fact that diesel cars have won over the last few years as evidence that diesel cars are unfairly advantaged, but obviously it's not as simple as that. You would expect the works teams to outperform the privateers, so it's impossible to perfectly judge the equivalence formula simply based on the teams' performances.
I thought that Audi and Pug both announced derv projects at the same time actually... ?
They are supposedly committed to equivalency between diesel and petrol entries, but they basically have failed and the current rules do indeed favour Diesel (according to Porsche, who have on several occasions sited it as a reason for them not having interest in fielding a works entry and indeed Audi. They were quoted a number of times last year in the coverage as having said that they thought that they could make a better car {in terms of handling and perhaps surprisingly eonomy} running on petrol but the regulations favoured oil. Obviously all of the current petrol runners concur with this, making Peugeot and the ACO the only people that have not if some way declared that the rules are currently loaded in their favour
).
The other factor making equivalency tough is presumably the same one that has been quoted in touring cars in that getting genuine performance out of Diesel racing engines if not as generally researched and understood as petrol. Thus year on year the amount of development possible to refine the technology is greater - basically they can make greater advances.
I haven't really followed the stories for where the rules might go, but Eurosport said something about the diesels having to go down to 4.5 or 4.1 litre displacement next year [currently I believe that they a 5.5l twin turbo - versus up to 6l non-turbo for petrol in the Astons].
Anyone have up to date facts?
They are supposedly committed to equivalency between diesel and petrol entries, but they basically have failed and the current rules do indeed favour Diesel (according to Porsche, who have on several occasions sited it as a reason for them not having interest in fielding a works entry and indeed Audi. They were quoted a number of times last year in the coverage as having said that they thought that they could make a better car {in terms of handling and perhaps surprisingly eonomy} running on petrol but the regulations favoured oil. Obviously all of the current petrol runners concur with this, making Peugeot and the ACO the only people that have not if some way declared that the rules are currently loaded in their favour
).The other factor making equivalency tough is presumably the same one that has been quoted in touring cars in that getting genuine performance out of Diesel racing engines if not as generally researched and understood as petrol. Thus year on year the amount of development possible to refine the technology is greater - basically they can make greater advances.
I haven't really followed the stories for where the rules might go, but Eurosport said something about the diesels having to go down to 4.5 or 4.1 litre displacement next year [currently I believe that they a 5.5l twin turbo - versus up to 6l non-turbo for petrol in the Astons].
Anyone have up to date facts?
RichB said:
As I understand it the diesel succeeded because they required fewer fuel stops (and hence less time wasted) rather than on outright power, but I may be wrong. In any case I think that artificially tinkering with the regs to allow one or other to win is wrong and as much as it grieves me to say it, if a diesel can be made to give more power to weight than a petrol and win races on equal footing then so be it.
This isnt true.The eurosport commentary after the race said that the winning car did MORE stops than the other top running cars.
The diesel is just more powerfull due to the regs
If the ACO tinker with the rules as suggested, 'fail' to make equivalency rules work (I'm thinking what does that remind me of, hmmm... WTCC, that's the FIA WTCC) favour a home manufacturer (French diesel) both on or off track, stifle petrol power, doesn't it make you wonder why Ferrari throw up the ACO as a paragon of corinthian racing spirit, and would pretend that they would consider moving to Le Mans instead of F1.
Although anyone who followed the build up to Le Mans, this week, you'd know Peugeot spent the week before protesting the Audi, front underbody (I don't know but it sounded familiar... errr like the double diffuser row), it'll probably be quietly forgotten now they've won, but have/had an outstanding protest against Audi, rejected by the ACO, as it happens that they are/were taking through the french federation, to, you guessed it... The FIA.
Congratulations to Peugeot, not so sure how the ACO will feel about Peugeot inviting the FIA into start sticking it's fingers any further into their affairs than ACO have managed to keep them at arms length.
Audi may have dropped the ball this year not spending enough time on the car, rather than putting on their 'event', and the corporate junket nature of Audi Le Mans just has to see the numbers of limos, shuttle buses and the numbers of people invited, some of the problems they have suffered with may have been discovered if they had run more than just Sebring, say Spa, or another round of the ALMS, and have been solved prior to Le Mans. If Audi comeback next year expect a thorough job. For all the promotional spend Audi have skiing, Le Mans, DTM, FC Bayern Munich, and the bean counters view motorsport as advertising, and the that's where most manufacturers motorsport budgets come from, rather than engineering development, it might, just might be, and here's crazy train of thought, be the time for Audi to go into F1, with the cost cap, if you want to reach the most people to advertise your wares for the least money.
Failing that it might just be we have to accept it is very very difficult to get equivalency rules to work.
I was at Le Mans in 07, and it was amazing a how quiet both the R10 and 908 were, but also the way they accelerate out of the slow corners, compared to the petrol cars, it was quite peculiar, they didn't corner as well, but the torque and acceleration was amazing, they were clinically industrial, in that regard, and very different to a screaming V12, or rumbling V8. And yet the both kind of cars need similar top speeds on the Mulsanne, or else it will be easy peasey for the car with best top speed. Very very different styles of going fast.
Dons flame retardant pants and withdraws.
Although anyone who followed the build up to Le Mans, this week, you'd know Peugeot spent the week before protesting the Audi, front underbody (I don't know but it sounded familiar... errr like the double diffuser row), it'll probably be quietly forgotten now they've won, but have/had an outstanding protest against Audi, rejected by the ACO, as it happens that they are/were taking through the french federation, to, you guessed it... The FIA.
Congratulations to Peugeot, not so sure how the ACO will feel about Peugeot inviting the FIA into start sticking it's fingers any further into their affairs than ACO have managed to keep them at arms length.
Audi may have dropped the ball this year not spending enough time on the car, rather than putting on their 'event', and the corporate junket nature of Audi Le Mans just has to see the numbers of limos, shuttle buses and the numbers of people invited, some of the problems they have suffered with may have been discovered if they had run more than just Sebring, say Spa, or another round of the ALMS, and have been solved prior to Le Mans. If Audi comeback next year expect a thorough job. For all the promotional spend Audi have skiing, Le Mans, DTM, FC Bayern Munich, and the bean counters view motorsport as advertising, and the that's where most manufacturers motorsport budgets come from, rather than engineering development, it might, just might be, and here's crazy train of thought, be the time for Audi to go into F1, with the cost cap, if you want to reach the most people to advertise your wares for the least money.
Failing that it might just be we have to accept it is very very difficult to get equivalency rules to work.
I was at Le Mans in 07, and it was amazing a how quiet both the R10 and 908 were, but also the way they accelerate out of the slow corners, compared to the petrol cars, it was quite peculiar, they didn't corner as well, but the torque and acceleration was amazing, they were clinically industrial, in that regard, and very different to a screaming V12, or rumbling V8. And yet the both kind of cars need similar top speeds on the Mulsanne, or else it will be easy peasey for the car with best top speed. Very very different styles of going fast.
Dons flame retardant pants and withdraws.
Edited by Northern Munkee on Sunday 14th June 23:44
ZeeTacoe said:
I know Pistonheads is at the top of tin foil sales but isn't the 24hours ran to FIA or IMSA specs and they have both been trying to equal out the petrol versus the diesels. In fact RS spyders have beaten R10s outright a few times in the states.
isnt that in the LMS ( Le Mans Series) which runs to ACO rules... not FIA Same as Le Mansnsmith1180 said:
Cant they just form a separate class for Diesel. I am right in remembering that Le Mans are multi class?
That would make sense but as Peugeot are apparently readying a hybrid racer perhaps they need a special class for that too. It's confusing enough as it is.Re the power out of corners - isn't that to do with the diesel car's use of turbocharging against the petrol car's lack thereof?
SamHH said:
nsmith1180 said:
Cant they just form a separate class for Diesel. I am right in remembering that Le Mans are multi class?
The overall win is the big prize and separate classes for different fuels aren't going to change that.From the ACO regulations:
5.5l turbo diesel vs 6l petrol? (or 4l turbo petrol) - the playing field has a distinct slope to it.....
A petrol car won't ever win again unless the balance is pushed back a bit
Graham said:
ZeeTacoe said:
I know Pistonheads is at the top of tin foil sales but isn't the 24hours ran to FIA or IMSA specs and they have both been trying to equal out the petrol versus the diesels. In fact RS spyders have beaten R10s outright a few times in the states.
isnt that in the LMS ( Le Mans Series) which runs to ACO rules... not FIA Same as Le MansThe draft 2011 regulations are freely available and it's a big change thoughout the grid, not just P1. They are here;
http://www.lemans.org/sport/sport/reglements/resso...
However, the ACO is organising a meeting of manufacturers for the end of June to try and thrash out some more clarity in the upcoming regulations, so they are very proactive in making changes.
Expect these rules to change however!
In essence, diesel engines will be 3.7 litre instead of 5.5, and P1 petrol engines will essentially be current P2 engines. P2 engines will be 2010 spec GT2 production engines. There is nothign stopping a P2 car running with a diesel engine.
Gazboy said:
What restrictions are there with the 4.0 turbo petrol engines? I'm assuming they have restrictions on cfm or inlet size or something?
They are effectively current GT2 engines, so same restrictor. However, I imagine the regulations will change quite a lot, or be refined, certainly after the meeting in June and probably throughout the year. There are quite a few documents released by the ACO, not least from the Silverstone press conference last year.The restrictors for GT2 aren't a single size, they are worked out with the following forumla;
ACO LMGT2 Technical regulations said:
D = {[D-1] x 1,034} + 1. The result will be rounded to the nearest decimal.
Clear as tarteflette!
Edited by Red Firecracker on Tuesday 16th June 16:27
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff