[WEC 2015]Nissan GT-R LM NISMO

[PlatinumZealot]

It was Ben Bowlby's poor management that caused it I would say. If he went with an electric KERS the team might have done better. There was too much risk in racing that Flybrid kers and mechanically driving the rear wheels.

[djos]

It was Ben Bowlby's poor management that caused it I would say. If he went with an electric KERS the team might have done better. There was too much risk in racing that Flybrid kers and mechanically driving the rear wheels.

+1 why on earth he went with mechanical connections for energy recovery is beyond me. It's a real shame casue the rest of the concept deserved to be given a red hot go.

[Cold Fussion]

The writing was on the wall when they sacked Ben Bowlby.

[machin]

I thought he was still working with them (up until yesterday!); I thought they'd put someone else in to manage the project, allowing him to concentrate on the technical side.

I think they simply underestimated how good the other cars are: BB thought he'd found a loophole, but utilising that loophole meant compromises in other areas that turned out to be too detrimental. It was a similar story with the deltawing IMO.

[FW17]

I find it amazing that a manufacturer backed lmp1 programme had just 40 people in it; in comparison Manor team by far the smallest in F1 has around 150 people.


I was wondering if the new design would have been front engine rear gear box rear wheel drive with the KERS at the front. Apparently the new design they worked on had the engine power at front and KERS completely at the back which would have completely negated the benefits of having additional mass at the front and hence more energy to harvest at the front.

Then again if they had gone for a front engine rear gear box rear wheel drive then it would have just been a hybrid Panoz GTR1.

[wesley123]

It was Ben Bowlby's poor management that caused it I would say. If he went with an electric KERS the team might have done better. There was too much risk in racing that Flybrid kers and mechanically driving the rear wheels.

Afaik it was a management decision. I can remember it reading somewhere that Torotrak made all kinds of promises about their hybrid systems.

I find it amazing that a manufacturer backed lmp1 programme had just 40 people in it; in comparison Manor team by far the smallest in F1 has around 150 people.

Agreed. Sounds to me like they were seriously understaffed. I'm fairly certain Porsche, Audi and Toyota all have way more employees involved in their LMP project

[bill shoe]

The Delta Wing confused the issue. Which thing was it a test bed for?--

1. The new chassis/aero configuration (the delta thing)?, or
2. A car that didn’t meet any technical requirements such as minimum weight or powertrain requirements?

This confusion gave Ben Bowlby a false confidence that Delta Wing was a significant improvement in chassis/aero configuration, but it was probably just a mundane example that it’s easy to be on pace in a racing series if you don’t comply with any of the rules that are intended to restrict speed.

The Nissan LMP-1 also had a chassis/aero configuration gimmick, but it had to comply with normal class rules. Result was clear demonstration that chassis gimmick was not a performance success.

Overall, the LMP-1 exercise was frustrating to watch because it confirmed that creativity and new thinking could not find a new niche within the current rule set. I don’t see this as a positive outcome.

[machin]

Overall, the LMP-1 exercise was frustrating to watch because it confirmed that creativity and new thinking could not find a new niche within the current rule set. I don’t see this as a positive outcome.

If anything I'd say the current rules actually promoted the opportunity for something "different" (I prefer "different" since "innovative" to me means "new and better"; this wasn't better); it was a restriction in the amount of rear-end downforce that led BB down the road of thinking a front bias to the mass and tyre footprint would be beneficial... If the rules were totally free I think it's clear what configuration the cars would take; you only have to look through the development of F1 cars from 1950 to the 1990's to see what configuration "natural selection" would result in.

[noname]

I find it amazing that a manufacturer backed lmp1 programme had just 40 people in it; in comparison Manor team by far the smallest in F1 has around 150 people.(...)

I can not resist the feeling "Nissan's strong commitment to motorsports" ends when when it comes to back it up with investments.

It's true they claimed some respectable results in the lower series, but on the top level they are non-existent. They like to promote their innovative approach, like Delta Wing or LMP1 assault, however, at the end of the day, what really matters is the results.

[Sevach]

I wonder if Ghosn greenlighting Renault's return as a factory team influenced this decision.

I was curious about the concept of this car, but not with a team that can't get the basics right.

[dmjunqueira]

I'm very sad for the end of the project.
As an engineering enthusiast, I enjoyed the unprecedented level of information the team provided on this.
My biggest disappointment is that they didn't manage to get KERS working.
IMHO the outcome of this history could be very different if they did.

[bill shoe]

If anything I'd say the current rules actually promoted the opportunity for something "different" (I prefer "different" since "innovative" to me means "new and better"; this wasn't better); it was a restriction in the amount of rear-end downforce that led BB down the road of thinking a front bias to the mass and tyre footprint would be beneficial... If the rules were totally free I think it's clear what configuration the cars would take; you only have to look through the development of F1 cars from 1950 to the 1990's to see what configuration "natural selection" would result in.

Well, yea, good point. The ideal situation is to find a new approach within more of a "natural selection" framework. The new approach would not necessarily be something crazy like a front-engine front-drive configuration. I think there is lots of room for natural innovation if current tight rules were loosened up.

[Facts Only]

An interesting project killed by short sighted OEM bean counters.

Same thing happened with the R390 back in the day as well. You have to put the time in to win in Motorsport. Mercedes, Renault, Audi have learnt this but Nissan haven't.

Would be nice if they stuck the CAD online and let everyone have at it.

[FW17]

My biggest disappointment is that they didn't manage to get KERS working.
IMHO the outcome of this history could be very different if they did.

I am not sure

Nissan target was some 1000 hp KERS; hence they went for the mechanical system

A battery system for 8 MJ would have been 50 kgs,
Electronics 20 kgs
MGU 125 kgs with the current estimate of 8KW/kg

Not sure if a 200 kg system would have any benifit

[TzeiTzei]

My biggest disappointment is that they didn't manage to get KERS working.
IMHO the outcome of this history could be very different if they did.

I am not sure

Nissan target was some 1000 hp KERS; hence they went for the mechanical system

A battery system for 8 MJ would have been 50 kgs,
Electronics 20 kgs
MGU 125 kgs with the current estimate of 8KW/kg

Not sure if a 200 kg system would have any benifit

Well Porsche managed to do that. And the 8MJ battery system was a great advantage to them.