Petrol/Diesel equivalency & the future of Endurance

[vyselegend]

The european endurance season is running to it's end, with the last LMS round comming soon at Silverstone (september 14th), and I think it's time to look back and analyse the relative performance levels of everyone, trying to have a clearer view of what needs to be done to level the prototype field. It is obvious that diesels are dominating the debates, Peugeot and Audi claiming 100% of the available wins this year on this side of the pound. But I think the general tendency to blame the ACO for favouring diesel engines is oversimplistic, and doesn't takes in account some raw facts from this year LM.

Indeed, regular-fuel powered Dome/Judd S102 prototype wasn't laid on it's four wheel since two weeks when it happily started to slash through the 908's best times of 2007, while the Pug had covered several Le Mans distances in testing and won two competitions by then. Another regular-fuel powered beauty to frighten the giants was the Lola-Aston Martin, a factory backed Lola B08/60 using the V12 of the DBR9 GT1 car. While this type of package can seem inefficient at first sight (it use a non-stressed engine, asking for more chassis rigidity, and the block itself is heavier and obviously not optimised for the chassis), it occured to be very succesful, as it is allowed to run larger air restrictor than common LMP1s. That power boost, combined with the new generation aero of the coupes is allowing greater top speeds than the rest of the field, with the exception of the diesel powered factory cars. I'm more and more convinced as time flows that the two big ones are honnests finally, the rules aren't favouring diesels so much, their dominance is more likely due to the (HUGE) difference of development funds, which reflects in both factory R&D and track testing (I think Peugeot and Audi have cummulated something like 30 000 km of testing prior to LM, comparing to 6000 km for the rest - approx figures of course but the ratio is at least that big).

What I mean is that a big manufacturer would have every chances to win with conventional petrol even with the current rules (more precisely by exploiting the "GT engined proto" loophole.)

For sure things will be reworked in the 2009 rulebook, which stays a bit of a question mark, as it won't be published before september at least!!! There is an interesting report on Planetlemans, stating that Patrick Peter is discussing the matter with everyone involved, asking the team their position about several key points.

Even the format of LMS is being questionned, as everyone is laughing at the "5 races championnship" current system, but no one is willing to spend more money to extend the calendar. Among the propositions made by the ACO is the withdrawal of the 1000 km format in favour of 4hours max races (the duration of Road America in ALMS), or the even more TV friendly 3 hours race format, with two races by week end then. The aim is to have more races, possibly up to eight races for the European LMS championship. I'd personaly prefers to keep the classic 1000km format if possible, but if not possible then OK for the 4 hours, but with the additions of three other races (What about Estoril, A1 ring and Istanbul, or Zolder?).

Another proposal is to add the "Big" american events (namely Sebring and Petit le Mans) in the european championship, but as it already counts for ALMS it couldn't admit everyone, or we'll have a 70 cars field LOL.

Outside Europe, the ALMS adaptation of the ACO rules shouldn't change too much, the serie carrying on it's "green" efforts, while Acura and Corvette seems to be pushing for the good old GTP idea (an effort to make protos look like stock vehicles), a concept European constructors don't want to hear about, arguing that race prototypes have to look like race prototypes, otherwise you'd better run in a Touring series.

Meanwhile, the ACO proudly annouced the creation of a Japanese Le Mans Series, which is curriously named "All Japan Sports Car Endurance Series" (AJSCES). It should start in 2009 but the technical rulebook is still blurry. But this is to be undertsood as a confirmation of the raising mutual interest between japanese manufacturers and Endurance racing.

Well, I know we're not many endurance fannatics on F1T, but I though all this stuff were worth a discussion, as I personnaly found it quite exiting.

What are your views?

[RacingManiac]

I share the same view as you on the diesel/petrol debate. No one has been spending the same level of funds as Peugeot or Audi in making an actual factory backed LMP1 petrol effort. While it is easy to say that diesel were much favored back in 2006, when they ran 90 liter tank, with the reduction in tank size their economical advantage has been slashed. I think in the recent Racecar Engineering issue Aston Martin racing has been quoted as saying "look at us, we are not exactly small and privateer team, and we still can't beat them". That still not quite true, as they still are not using a bespoke chassis and done all the optimizing development work as the big 2 to create their contender.

And people tend to be short on their memory span as well, as not so long ago there was a petrol car that could do 3:30s around Le Mans AND get 15 laps of fuel mileage, it was the Audi R8. I dare to venture to say that no one yet have built a petrol endurance engine at that level yet, and until someone does, no one can say for sure if the diesels are indeed faster, if given current tires and aero rules. I am sure Audi knows, but they aren't risking it to let someone find out. That is why even if R8 is eligible to run in ALMS as a private LMP1, Audi aren't letting anyone do it....

I am not sure ACO's approach to appease to the small teams is correct, as none of them have the same kind of money at stake as the manufacturer, and rush adjustment of rule(well not exactly rush now) will just allow other manufacturer to take advantage of the new rule. I can practically hear Porsche and Acura's colletive drool hitting the floor if the new rule bends in much favor to the petrol cars....

I mean Porsche now is in the direct injection business now too....and they kinda own VAG....hmmm...

[dumrick]

Until recently, the best petrol effort in LMP1 was from Pescarolo, with limited resources, client engine and a very old Courage C60 chassis (although with much development work on it). And, even if the new Lola and Dome chassis seem to be well born, there may still be a difference for a team to own and develop internally a design or to race a car as a client, even if the Courage and Acura approaches with Courage chassis may, with adequate funding, be equally successful. Chassis-wise, I figure that running a Diesel may force you to run a bespoke designed chassis, because of the particular packaging and cooling demands, but if you're running a classic petrol engine, outsourcing the chassis may not be the main issue.
The equivalence of rules is now even more complicated, because there is the 3rd. option (GT engine with larger restrictors) that is being used by Aston Martin. One may ask if a team like ORECA/Courage - with their new and state-of-the-art development on the C70 - is getting a fair treatment against the Lola-Aston Martin, since their respective competitiveness seems very different and the amount of talent and resources may be more or less on pair. Do you think that the closed cockpit nature of the Lola gives it an advantage? Except the air conditioning rule that may allow them a bigger restrictor, every comment I've read seems to fundamentally state the 2 options as equivalent.
Also, even trickier developments may arise with the permission of hybrid technology in the near future. Some constructors seem a little disappointed as the rules are only coming out November, too late for the start of the season and even - possibly - for Le Mans, but Toyota is rumoured to be keen on exploring that route, especially with their know-how on racing hybrids, just like Peugeot is certain to be going to race a hybrid Diesel, Audi is rumoured to be doing the same and Zytek will have some kind of hybrid running this year still. How the rules are finished in terms of concerns about field leveling will be paramount to attract new constructors with different formulae, like in the better days of Endurance.

Summing up, with the announced death of the GT1 class, Aston Martin and Corvette either are or may be willing to make the move to protos, Acura/Honda was also linked with a move to the higher proto class, Toyota is putting its toe in the water with the Dome... seems that much money will be put forward to race in a category that is currently split in 2/3 regional championships, limiting its potential for exposure. There are tough decisions to be made: even if Audi is already racing LMES and ALMS and Peugeot is already making trips to the other side of the pond, much of the field and the spirit of the series lies on privateers that may be threatened if some kind of World Championship is put in place, with a lot of races and big journeys to be done. Maybe the discussion about race formats be a key to increase revenues for this kind of racing that may turn a global series sustainable for the little ones and interesting for the big ones? Anyhow, we'll always have Le Mans...

[dumrick]

And people tend to be short on their memory span as well, as not so long ago there was a petrol car that could do 3:30s around Le Mans AND get 15 laps of fuel mileage, it was the Audi R8.

How many laps were doing this year the best gasoline vehicles?

The R8's complying with the hybrid aero regulations should still be more than 15 seconds off the Peugeots and a fair amount behind the Lola/Aston or the Dome...

[RacingManiac]

I think it was 13-14 at best...One has to remember too that R8 was bulletproof, it had zero engine failure during its entire life in race condition. Same cannot be said for Judd, even in its endurance trim.

Obviously a straight LMP1 hybrid will not work with R8, but then R8 has pretty been frozen since 2002, and clamped down significantly from that point on. But I am sure back in 2006, when R10 just came out, if the R8 was allowed to race, Audi would be sweating beads because in R8 you have a car thats easier to drive, proven to be 100% reliable AND fast, and you can count on it to finish the race whereas R10 would've been an unknown.

Really though, all I am suggesting is that the petrol rules as it is now has not been fully exploited yet, to the same extend as Audi and Peugeot are attacking the diesel reg, or the Acura and Porsche are attacking the LMP2 reg. You cannot expect the same level of results from a Pescarolo or a Lola, when they are not commiting the same level of resources into a project like the manufacturers are. Even when ACO do change the rule to pull the favor for the petrols, you are not going to see Pescarolo or Oreca winning the race, since a Porsche or a Acura will be doing it at that point....its never going to be friendly for the small guys. Pesca lost their best chance in 2005, against a R8 with both hands tied behind their back, they will not get a shot like that again.....

[modbaraban]

I'm not the most knowledgable Endurance racing fan here, so I'll start by asking questions.

Summing up, with the announced death of the GT1 class...

- What are the already known changes due next year?
- What happened to GT1 and why, how is the new GTs classification sorted? Does GT1 stay within FIA GT and ALMS?
- Any idea about Audi's plans? They're not racing R10 in 2009, are they?
- Will the GT-Proto engone loophole stay (obviously it would be closed be it F1, but it's not )

(What about Estoril, A1 ring and Istanbul, or Zolder?).

Wasn't it deserted?

[dumrick]

Obviously a straight LMP1 hybrid will not work with R8, but then R8 has pretty been frozen since 2002, and clamped down significantly from that point on

The new aero regulations came in place in 2004, I'm pretty sure that the R8's raced from then on were hybrid aero and must have been outlawed after the transition period was through.

- What happened to GT1 and why, how is the new GTs classification sorted? Does GT1 stay within FIA GT and ALMS?

I was mainly talking from a sporting point of view and within both Le Mans Series. This year, the amount of entrants has decreased below acceptable and Aston Martin and Corvette are already looking elsewhere. It may continue to exist for some time, but is surely in death row

- Any idea about Audi's plans? They're not racing R10 in 2009, are they?

It hasn't been announced yet, but there have been talks about a new car, possibly a Diesel Hybrid.

- Will the GT-Proto engine loophole stay?

It's not really a loophole as such and the ACO has even announced that the capacity limits currently imposed will disappear, for the Corvette engine to become eligible.

[RacingManiac]

Obviously a straight LMP1 hybrid will not work with R8, but then R8 has pretty been frozen since 2002, and clamped down significantly from that point on

The new aero regulations came in place in 2004, I'm pretty sure that the R8's raced from then on were hybrid aero and must have been outlawed after the transition period was through.

Nope, the rule was announced in 2003, 2004 was the grace period, where any car can compete still albeit with some restriction(power, and rear wing size). 2005 They still let non-hybrids compete, but at much reduced power. Hence from 2004 on R8 were run with those "boxes" at the end of their rear wing because their actual wing span was reduced, and that's why by 2005 the hybrid Pesca's were 20-30kph faster than the R8s on the Mulsanne, because Pesca were on LMP1 restrictor(as a hybrid reg car), and they were running airconditioning, resulting maximum possible restrictor size compare to the R8 which were probably making barely over 500bhp at this point....

[dumrick]

Nope, the rule was announced in 2003, 2004 was the grace period, where any car can compete still albeit with some restriction(power, and rear wing size). 2005 They still let non-hybrids compete, but at much reduced power. Hence from 2004 on R8 were run with those "boxes" at the end of their rear wing because their actual wing span was reduced, and that's why by 2005 the hybrid Pesca's were 20-30kph faster than the R8s on the Mulsanne, because Pesca were on LMP1 restrictor(as a hybrid reg car), and they were running airconditioning, resulting maximum possible restrictor size compare to the R8 which were probably making barely over 500bhp at this point....

I didn't recall that transitional period well anymore! Thanks for the explanations.

[vyselegend]

Neither was I.
From the R8 I had kept the image of the car being regular and incredibly reliable, but not that fast. In my mind it was a good exemple of the typical Le Mans winner, as historically the 24 hours doesn’t give the win to the fastest car. Thanks Racing Maniac for refreshing our memories. It’s true the beast had it’s apogee in the early 2000s, before being let down by Audi’s R&D in benefits of the R10.

About the death of GT1, first we have to remember the GT rules are not optimised by the ACO, they are copied and pasted from the FIA, precisely to allow the crews to do both FIA GT and LMS / ALMS. Then I think the current teams (Corvette Racing, Aston Martin, Modena, Larbre, Bell motorsport, LAA, IBP spartak, etc) are all unsatisfied with the costs of their program, particulary in relation to the GT2 (some educated informations would be welcome here, as I don’t have numbers to back this recurent speech.) Logic is that costs are increasing with fuel consumptions, and tyre usage maybe, but I don’t think there is so much money involved in development of those GT1 cars, especially from private teams, although it is quite clear that factories aren’t sleeping : see how Chevrolet made radical improvement to the C6R to gain further top speed between 2007 and this year (yet they didn’t beat Astons this time again…) So there is some more light to be shed on the issue of costs, but another main reason of the general feeling of dissatisfaction, is the status of GTs against LMPs in the series, with the former regulary pushed off by Proto’s driver who seems to think they’re the « top class » and GTs are there just to fill the race.

This is a delicate debate, as the opposite is true too, GT cars are regulary destroying LMPs races (remember Drayson recently, turning his Aston into Montagny’s Acura like if he was alone, robbing AGR of an important victory at road america, and the opposite exemple, at 1000 km of Nurburgring, where both LAA corvettes has been collided by LMP2 protos unshamefully missing their braking point…) The result obviously is a raising tension between the classes, who frighten each other by running on the same track with 150 km/h difference in speed. That’s not a new problem tho. It just seem the frustration has become too strong.

It has to be said also : the general assumption that the Proto class is professional and the GT class full of amateurs is turning wrong too. There are more and more professional drivers in GT (like Brunni or Salo in GT2 Ferraris for exemple), while the LMP class on the opposite has been democratised, and we now see billionaires driving protos in total amateurship, taking clumsy lines and overtaking in dangerous conditions. Villeneuve & Montagny were particulary vocals about that at LM.


Modbaraban, it’s a shame to hear A1 ring is unsuited to racing now, I though Dieter Mateschitz was about to inject a few 800 millions dollars in the track for a total revamp, but a quick googleing taught me it wasn’t going to happen indeed (for "political" reasons, whith no further explainations in the french article...) . Well maybe we should have a race in your area if it’s not too snowy, or a street track in St Petersbourg, like I think the FIA GT did (or it was Bucharest in Romania and I’m being confused by Renault’s demos in the Russian city…)

The GT engined proto loophole, as Dumrick said, isn’t exactly a loophole, but more likely a bait to drag Corvette in (and potentially others). As for the closed structure of coupes, I think this is precisely what allows GT engined protos to be competitives, as it bring improved rigidity to the monocoque, helping to deal with the main flaw of an unstressed engine choice.

Audi have made no secret of their intention to bring a new car next year, driver Alexandre Premat even saying R10 development have been frozen since LM, prompting Ralph Juttner (sp ?) into a defensive remark along the lines of « oh well, we are still improving the R10 here and there blablabla but there is no further big development on the car blablabla » (in fact a lot of blabla to confirm the R10 is finished already.)
As Peugeot, they are unhappy about the rules for next year being not published before september at best, and november at worst like has been quoted ! I’m astonished to read they are « just » unhappy ! If I were in charge of building a new car ready for next season (starting in march at Sebring), I’d be pissed already not to have the full rulebook in june, so having it in november is looking like a bad joke !

[modbaraban]

Sorry of this one is a bit offtopic. I always wondered about electronic aids used in protos and fast GTs like GT1 and GT2. Surely those would be very beneficial for driving and fuel economy (esp. on the wet). Are there any? If not, how the ban is enforced? With such different engines I doubt there can be a SECU solution

[vyselegend]

I'm pretty sure electronic aids are allowed in GT classes, just like they are in LMP. Not 100% certain about launch control, but TC is definitly used. As for onbard engine mapping systems, or electronic controled brake bias and such stuff, I admit I don't know, but IMO those sytems don't exist in GT cars. One reason is cost versus performance advantage, and also don't forget the main philosophy in racing engineering is that any part of the car is just one more part which can fail and cost victory. And that aspect is particulary underlined in endurance. In that respect I don't think any GT team would rely too much on such capricious systems as electronics.

Now that I think about it, I've seen cars park off the track with various causes of mechanicals and/or hydraulics breakdown, like faulty fuel/oil pumps, broken gearboxes/damaged clutches, or simply pure engine failures, but I don't remember having seen a GT car abandonment because of an electronic related problem.

Also, one of the main reason for the introduction of the SECU in F1 was to prevent any team to take a performance advantage from electronics, as it was commonly judged F1 should not be about who runs the best computer, and so the aim was to aim back the performance to mechanical parts.
In all LM series, the argument is irrelevant because the performance is controlled by the air admition restictor's dimentions, so there is a fixed maximum possible rendment for an engine dictated by physics laws. I believe the potential performance gain for those cars to be marginal in comparison to other aspects.

The proto case is another story though, as they are more or less some heavy formula1 cars in disguise. It is wildely admitted that one of the principal advantage Audi had in the wet to outpace Peugeot was a clearly supperior TC system. I remember reading an interview of a Peugeot staff member where he admited their TC sucked in comparison.

[RacingManiac]

I think they are allowed full assortment of aids for the LMP and the GT1 cars, I am not sure about the GT2s at the moment. I think they even had launch control for the LMPs. As I remember the TV commentator mentioning Porsche have a system that couples the airjack system to the ignition and transmission system that when engaged the car will automatically fire as the airjack disengaged and launch the car off the pitbox with no wheelspin.

It probably is not that big of a surprise that Audi's TC system is more advanced than Peugeot's, considering back in 06 all the Audi drivers mentioned how much work it is to drive the car fast, then in 07 they had a complete overhaul of the engine tuning to make the car more drivable. Which is another key ingredient for success in long races...

[vyselegend]

A quick update of the topic.
The future of endurence, sadly, is ressembling Formula one's, through reduced rear wings, aiming at a serious drop of overall downforce. ORECA and Peugeot were testing those 2009 specs rear wings at Estoril the last few days:




Full-size pics here & there


OK, it's not as ugly as 2009 F1 (fortunately the wing hasn't been moved upward), but it still looks... Weird to say the least.

Meanwhile, Audi, who were in Portugal too with two 2008 spec R10, unveiled a concept car at Los Angeles Auto Show, called... R25! It has to be noted that the shows theme was "Racing in 2025", so the concept is in no way an official presentation of the R10's successor. Still, with the IMSA & ALMS stickers on the side...





It reminds a lot of the way Peugeot introduced their 908 car, with a mock-up which doesn't reveal the true shape of the racing car, but gives some serious hints about it. In that case, it seems the new Audi LMP1 will definitly be a coupe, something the Dr.Ullrich was not very keen to see, but which has probably been deemed as more efficient, judging the incredible pace of Peugeot, Lola-Aston and Dome this year. Unsurprisingly the brand seems also very interested in Electric propulsion and hybrid technologies, though both them and Peugeot will have to wait 2010 to be allowed to score points with such systems.

Still no news of Acura's P1 car ATM...

Last, but not least, the rumors of a possible Toyota return are amplifying. The Dome S102 have been spoted testing an hybrid powertrain on Tokachi circuit, with Toyota's Ahira Iida at the wheel.

________________________________________
Pics and infos glanned from http://www.endurance-series.com/ (french only), http://www.endurance-info.com (french mainly), and http://www.planetlemans.com/, a GREAT site in english. Don't forget also cheking http://www.mulsannescorner.com (there an interesting study of an "exotic" implementation of the reduced rear wing from Michael J.Fuller on the main page that is worth a look, and also interesting close ups of Porsches newly-introduced rim shields.). For pics of Group C, LMP 900, and modern LMPs (as well as historic racers), don't forget benjabulle's website http://www.gurneyflap.com.

[modbaraban]

Thanks for sharing. Very interesting.

I can't see a problem with this wing though. Doesn't come even close to that clear evidence of retardation at the back of 2009 F1 cars.
If there's anything wrong for me with the looks of the modern protos, it has to be the F1-style nosecone with pillars. I perfer them looking more like sportscars, rather than F1 cars with fenders (Caparo T1-like).

PS: but that new Audi is sweeeeeeeet

PPS: Any news on the GT classes? Will all Corvette teams switch to GT2 worldwide or is it just Corvette Racing @ ALMS? Looks like AM are serious about V8 Vantage in GT2 too. The GT1 future doesn't look good.