Monday 28th September 2009

New Aston Racer For 2011 Le Mans

Next generation LMP1 car to feature Aston engine and chassis

---

Aston Martin boss David Richards has revealed that the company is working on an all-new LMP1 Le Mans challenger for 2011.

Aston's current Le Mans cars use a Lola-derived chassis powered by a 6.0-litre V12 originally developed for the DBR9 GT1 racer. The twelve-cylinder mill won't be eligible under 2011 Le Mans rules, however, so Aston Martin Racing needs a new powerplant.

Rather than using bought-in engine tech, however, Richards has revealed to US car mag Auto Week that Aston Martin Racing is hard at work developing an all-new bespoke racing engine - and that the chassis around it will also be a fully in-house Aston Martin design.

Aston could take the new car and engine racing next year, but the team feels that the 2010 Le Mans rules - set in stone late last month - still favour diesels over petrols, and Aston won't be producing a diesel-powered racer (thank goodness).

"We are far enough down the road with the design that we could have done it for next year if the petrol-diesel equivalence had been sensible" Team principal George Howard-Chappell told Auto Week. "That is clearly not the case."

Richards also said that he was keen for Aston Martin Racing to stop working on a year-to-year basis and concentrate instead on three-year campaigns. That could mean that there will be no works Astons at Le Mans next year, while the team concentrates on its 2011 car, although this year's Lola-Aston coupes could end up racing in private hands.

[Valentin]

The initial message was deleted from this topic on 28 October 2021 at 09:14

[Project 644]

As they say, the ACO still have some way to go before the Petrol/Diesel equivalency is even. Otherwise there is no point in contesting the LMP1 category.

[VladD]

Let's also hope that the ACO sort themselves out so we can get shot of the diesels and have proper cars at Le Mans again.

[Project 644]

VladD said:

Let's also hope that the ACO sort themselves out so we can get shot of the diesels and have proper cars at Le Mans again.

Or just sort it so the race will be fair and the Petrol cars have half a chance of victory.

[The Angry Gopher]

Gutted there'll be no works Astons next year

[axbeale]

VladD said:

Let's also hope that the ACO sort themselves out so we can get shot of the diesels and have proper cars at Le Mans again.

here here.....

having been to Le Mans for the last 7 years, the diesel element really have take the edge off it some what. AM breathed a breath of fresh air on this years race and I for one hope that the ACO start to seriously think about the diesel pap that is starting to unhinge the whole racing ethos of Le Mans! The last few years have even seen the relative demise of other teams, such as Pescarolo for example, who have simply been pushed aside by the diesel power of Audi/Peugeot and the ACO rule book. Why try to compete and develop when such is against you!!

[Frimley111R]

+ 1. I don't understand how you can have two engines working in different ways and with different fuels in the same race. Same applies to WTCC etc.

[blueST]

I agree that the diesels should be got rid of, purely on the basis that they sound rubbish!

I don't necessarily agree though that the equivelancy is to blame. On the face of it, the diesels do seem to hold a significant advantage, but there are no petrol cars with anything like Audi and Peugeot's resources behind them. The Aston operation is tiny in comparison.

Until we see a full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget, we'll never know for sure but I am a bit worried that things could swing the other way. The ACO will adjust the regs so that the relatively small fry Astons, Pescarolos and Orecas of this world can compete with the big money diesels. Then someone like Acura or maybe BMW will roll up with a no expense spared P1 petrol car and wipe the floor with everyone. Then we'll be back to square one, except the winner will have a noisy engine, which is good.

[Lost my mojo]

blueST said:

I agree that the diesels should be got rid of, purely on the basis that they sound rubbish!

I don't necessarily agree though that the equivelancy is to blame. On the face of it, the diesels do seem to hold a significant advantage, but there are no petrol cars with anything like Audi and Peugeot's resources behind them. The Aston operation is tiny in comparison.

Until we see a full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget, we'll never know for sure but I am a bit worried that things could swing the other way. The ACO will adjust the regs so that the relatively small fry Astons, Pescarolos and Orecas of this world can compete with the big money diesels. Then someone like Acura or maybe BMW will roll up with a no expense spared P1 petrol car and wipe the floor with everyone. Then we'll be back to square one, except the winner will have a noisy engine, which is good.

I can't remember the exact figures but the pugs had a ridiculous power advantage over the petrols this year. It was documented in Autosport. I think its great that the diesels are getting big power outputs but at least make it fair for the petrols to be able to make the same amount of power. Otherwise what's the point.

[slivka]

blueST said:

I agree that the diesels should be got rid of, purely on the basis that they sound rubbish!

I don't necessarily agree though that the equivelancy is to blame. On the face of it, the diesels do seem to hold a significant advantage, but there are no petrol cars with anything like Audi and Peugeot's resources behind them. The Aston operation is tiny in comparison.

Until we see a full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget, we'll never know for sure but I am a bit worried that things could swing the other way. The ACO will adjust the regs so that the relatively small fry Astons, Pescarolos and Orecas of this world can compete with the big money diesels. Then someone like Acura or maybe BMW will roll up with a no expense spared P1 petrol car and wipe the floor with everyone. Then we'll be back to square one, except the winner will have a noisy engine, which is good.

...and you don't see a "full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget" because the manufacturer's that could provide such a car (i.e Porsche, Ferrari, etc) have done their math and know that you can't build a gasoline engine that can compete against the diesels under the current regulations.

[Finchy172]

Yay extremely pleased they wont be going down the diesel route!

Although the diesel LMP1 cars amaze me with the quiet whoosh as they pass and the sheer speed of the things there is no substitue for a roaring singing petrol engine!

[Nick M]

Lost my mojo said:

blueST said:

I agree that the diesels should be got rid of, purely on the basis that they sound rubbish!

I don't necessarily agree though that the equivelancy is to blame. On the face of it, the diesels do seem to hold a significant advantage, but there are no petrol cars with anything like Audi and Peugeot's resources behind them. The Aston operation is tiny in comparison.

Until we see a full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget, we'll never know for sure but I am a bit worried that things could swing the other way. The ACO will adjust the regs so that the relatively small fry Astons, Pescarolos and Orecas of this world can compete with the big money diesels. Then someone like Acura or maybe BMW will roll up with a no expense spared P1 petrol car and wipe the floor with everyone. Then we'll be back to square one, except the winner will have a noisy engine, which is good.

I can't remember the exact figures but the pugs had a ridiculous power advantage over the petrols this year. It was documented in Autosport. I think its great that the diesels are getting big power outputs but at least make it fair for the petrols to be able to make the same amount of power. Otherwise what's the point.

I think it's also exacerbated by the fact that it's not *just* the power figures which are the issue, but the fact that diesel has a higher calorific value than petrol (for the same volume of fuel, the way they produce the power (and oodles of torque), while still managing to be more fuel efficient than a similarly powerful petrol engine.

I read in Autosport ages ago about the fun and games they were having with touring cars trying to come up with some equivalency formula and it was trying to balance turbo boost levels and fuel flows to try and deliver the same amount of 'calories' to each engine type. And it wasn't easy by the sound of things.


Perhaps controversially, I don't mind what fuel teams use provided we get a race each year. The years up to 2008 were a bit dull, but 2008 was a proper lights to flag race and 2009 wasn't a walk in the park for Peugeot. The more cars in the race the better, but care is needed to make sure the balance of power doesn't swing too far one way or the other, and I don't envy the ACO trying to do that - pretty much whatever they decide will be 'wrong' to someone or another...

[blueST]

slivka said:

blueST said:

I agree that the diesels should be got rid of, purely on the basis that they sound rubbish!

I don't necessarily agree though that the equivelancy is to blame. On the face of it, the diesels do seem to hold a significant advantage, but there are no petrol cars with anything like Audi and Peugeot's resources behind them. The Aston operation is tiny in comparison.

Until we see a full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget, we'll never know for sure but I am a bit worried that things could swing the other way. The ACO will adjust the regs so that the relatively small fry Astons, Pescarolos and Orecas of this world can compete with the big money diesels. Then someone like Acura or maybe BMW will roll up with a no expense spared P1 petrol car and wipe the floor with everyone. Then we'll be back to square one, except the winner will have a noisy engine, which is good.

...and you don't see a "full house petrol P1 from someone with a big budget" because the manufacturer's that could provide such a car (i.e Porsche, Ferrari, etc) have done their math and know that you can't build a gasoline engine that can compete against the diesels under the current regulations.

That might be true, but the point is we don't know for sure. I don't think the current rules situation fully accounts for a lack of big budget petrol teams, or the inability of the current teams to take the fight to the diesels.

The current fastest petrols are not that much slower over a single flying lap at Le Mans (about 2.5%) and that's before you get into whether the diesels had better drivers or not. I personally think they did on the whole. The Astons were also using a production derived petrol engine.

At Sebring, the Acura out qualified the diesels.

Porsche's attitude to all forms of racing at the moment is profit driven. If they wanted to, I'm sure that they could produce a petrol car to run the diesels pretty damn close. But their current corporate attitude is they only compete where they make money. And that means selling cars to privateers. They are not interested in beating the diesels because it would require a full works effort with the corresponding outlay. Until the board in Stuttgart wakes up and sees that the Porsche brand is founded in sportscar racing and needs continued success, nothing will change.

Ferrari's world is centered upon F1, it underpins all their marketing etc. As with Porsche they could do it if they wanted to, but for different reasons, they wont return to top flight sportscar racing unless they have a change of marketing strategy.

Acura would be the obvious challengers, but they only occasionally have to face the diesels in the US so maybe they are happy to save a bit of money comfortable in the knowledge that outside of Sebring and Petit they will be quick enough to win in the ALMS. They have delayed rolling out the brand in Europe which is a shame, as I think that would have been the incentive they'd need to really step up and show us what they can do.

I read somewhere that BMW have hinted they want to do something else now that they have given up on F1, whether that would be Le Mans or not I don't know and I wouldn't like to take a guess on what fuel they would want to use.

[slivka]

As you know, Le Mans is a special and unique track. Even so, the fastest NA engined P1 at Le Mans (007 Aston)during the race , set a best racing lap time 5 seconds slower than the fastest diesel engined car (#8 Peugeot). That equates to quite a substantial difference in pace.

[eLSerbera]

The equivalence formula is a problem...

Maybe they should allow the petrols to have a decent KERS system (and not castrated like in F1) and make the diesels heavier mybe let them have KERS too but give it less usable time...

The KERS could make up some of the efficiency lost to the diesels, or you could put an air brake on the diesels...



edited...

Edited by eLSerbera on Monday 28th September 15:33

[blueST]

eLSerbera said:

The equivalence formula is a problem...

Maybe they should allow the petrols to have a decent KERS system (and not castrated like in F1) and make the diesels heavier

The KERS could make up some of the efficiency lost to the diesels, or you could put an air brake on the diesels...

I think stuff like that is already permitted. There was a car a few years ago with a spinning flywheel type system, and a full hybrid has been trying to run in the ALMS this year.

The ACO are open to pretty much anything, especially if it sports green credentials.

[eLSerbera]

blueST said:

eLSerbera said:

The equivalence formula is a problem...

Maybe they should allow the petrols to have a decent KERS system (and not castrated like in F1) and make the diesels heavier

The KERS could make up some of the efficiency lost to the diesels, or you could put an air brake on the diesels...

I think stuff like that is already permitted. There was a car a few years ago with a spinning flywheel type system, and a full hybrid has been trying to run in the ALMS this year.


The ACO are open to pretty much anything, especially if it sports green credentials.

I did read something on that just a minute after posting... But from what I see all the regenerative systems are too limited in how much they give back, restrict the max fuel that can be used free up the engine size restrictions add in longer use of KERS, and see where they go.

[mark3man]

David Richards didn't specify an internal combustion engine, did he ? .......

[turbosei]

Aston should consider the ALMS as a testing series next year, the diesels only did 2 ALMS races this year, so weren't a factor in the championship, but most of the other petrol prototypes are there.

As for other manufacturers; sports car racing is a much more relevant marketing exercise than F1, particularly in the GT classes.

[GrahamG]

blueST said:

eLSerbera said:

The equivalence formula is a problem...

Maybe they should allow the petrols to have a decent KERS system (and not castrated like in F1) and make the diesels heavier

The KERS could make up some of the efficiency lost to the diesels, or you could put an air brake on the diesels...

I think stuff like that is already permitted. There was a car a few years ago with a spinning flywheel type system, and a full hybrid has been trying to run in the ALMS this year.

The ACO are open to pretty much anything, especially if it sports green credentials.

Not quite - The ACO have made it clear that a hybrid system can only be used to increase fuel efficiency NOT top end performance - That didn't impress Peugeot who had already built a car taking the opposite approach!