ACO Rule Changes

[landman]

http://www.lemans.org/en/races/24h/update/The-performances-of-the-cars-will-be-adjusted-for-the-Le-Mans-24-Hours_3755.html

Faster refuelling for les petrols, less weight for the [Oreca] 908 & a few other tweaks.

Comments/thoughts/observations?

[termietermite]

Henri speaks and presto!   I reckon that now he has de Chaunac in his corner too that the combined clout of 2 of France's most respected team bosses was just too much for them.  Especially with Oreca pouring so much  into FLM.

[Barry]

So Aston's recent lack luster performance was in fact a cunning plan to change the regulations. 
I hope so, but I doubt it.

[Lord Steve]

I haven't read Paul's link but I think the faster re-fuelling thing for open tops is largely irrelevant. The rules state that only two pit crew can work on the car changing tyres so the open tops advantage is negated. By the time they've changed all four tyres the closed top drivers can easily change.
The potential draw back with the Aston, (according to Audi's engine man Dr Ulrich Baretzky) is the fact that the 6 cylinder engine requires a longer crankshaft and is expected to suffer from "torsional vibrations". I can see what he means unless the engine has beefy main bearings. Dr Sconefinger - comments please.

Having read the interviews with Alan McNish and Tom Kristensen in Motor Sport magazine I think the Audi V6 is proving a bit of a handful in terms of how they manage corners with less power out of the corner.
My prediction: Peugeot 1st, Audi 2nd, Rebellion Lola 3rd.
Come on Aston!

[Kpy]

I haven't read Paul's link but I think the faster re-fuelling thing for open tops is largely irrelevant.

Please, oh please, read the article Steve!
Just for starters this has nothing to do with whether the cars are open or closed.

[Lazy B'stard]

It really is difficult to comment on. How can the ACO punish teams that have just done a better job? Forget the diesel versus petrol argument. Its David and Goliath. Its down to budgets. The only way to make things equal is to hand Lola, Pescarolo, Aston Martin £20,000,000 each. As much as i adore Henri i can't give time to his constant moaning about 'zer deesels'. Money talks at Le Mans and the factory teams just have much more.
 Cast your minds back a few years to when the Pesca's were 4-5 per lap quicker than the Audis. Did Pescarolo win? You could give any of the current petrol teams a five second per lap advantage but i'd still put my shirt on a diesel winning.

Steve. As for Astons comedy engine; i don't think vibration will be so much an issue. Remember those lovely Gulf GR8s back in the 70's? They had a flat plane DFV which as an engine for a two hour Grand Prix was the engine to have. It was surprisingly reliable considering it had to do 10 grand prix over the weekend, but the big issue is that the huge vibrations they generated broke just about every other componant on the car (including the chassis!).
 Aston's main blunder is trying to get 550bhp out of just two litres. Fine on a sprint engine but 24 hours? An engine at Le Mans will typically run 80% race distance at full throttle. A high revving 6 cylinder engine will have huge piston forces acting upon it. Each of those 6 pistons will change direction 150 times a second, hit 50mph mid bore before stopping and reversing. That equates to over 4000g at the TDC as it does so. Now add to that the strain of the high boost pressures that will be required to get that 550bhp and you have one seriously stressed engine. No chance it will last the distance. It would have mademuch more sense to go for the larger capacity, more cylinders and atmospheric induction under the current rules.
 It looks like the cars aero has been designed around this long narrow engine. The engine is a dud. No chance to start again and fit a different type of engine so they are buggered basicaly. Its a real shame as Prodrive are a class act. But a relative lack of experience at building sportscar has led them to make a fundamental flaw from the very start.

So as for performance balancing.... Give the Aston a 250 lap head start. My guess is it would still not trouble the podium. Not this year, not ever.

[garyfrogeye]

Oh the racing. That's a relief, for a minute there I thought that the ACO were changing a rule to say no alchohol on the camp sites.

[Nordic]

The winning Renault in 78 was a 2.1L turbo. Not sure what BHP it had for sure, but I have seen stated as over 500bhp.

The 936 which had a 2 valve 2.1L motor, still had over 500 BHP.

Clearly regs have changed and the amount of fuel each car can use has dropped, but both those engines where designed over 30 years ago so its not unbelievable that a new racing engine should not be able to at least match those figures.

[Rhino]

They have Norbert Singer the ex Porche boss doing the changes now. Hopefully he will put a minimum noise level on.

[Lazy B'stard]

Renault and Porsche also pumped millions of Dollars into the programe to make them reliable as well as calling upon years of experience and some of the best engineering minds in the business at that time. Its not unrealistic for a modern engine to produce that kind of output i know, but it takes so much more investment and engineering talent than has evidently been lavished on that dogs dinner.
 On what we have seen so far, we have an engine with serious reliability problems, issues with heat rejection and at best pumps out somewhere around 360- 400bhp before they have to wind it down to keep it going.

As for fuel, its not about the amount of fuel, rather the type of fuel...I don't believe there is a fuel formula these days; although unwise, you can use as much as you want. On the subject of fuel, back then the fuel companies spent millions developing turbo specific superbrews. Elf had a huge presence in F1 and the fuels they used then were very different to those used today (which are virtually forcourt pump fuels). The F1 turbo era fuels were chock full of additives and very oxygen rich to stop those motors exploding like grenades and were said to cost $100 per litre. Add inflation to that and you have some pretty expensive juice.

[Nordic]

There is clearly something very wrong with the Aston Engine, (and the car does not seem to handle either) The knowledge Porsche and Reggie had 30 years ago has not gone away, its been spread about, take you point about the fuel, but the electronics in a car engine are way beyond what was available 30 years ago so the need for special brews has reduced. Compared to a modern engine both those are pretty basic in alot of respects.

If Prodrive can fix the fault then maybe it will be able to put up a better show but its a big if.

No word from Aston that I have seen?

[Andy Zarse]

No word from Aston that I have seen?

I would not be surprised if Aston Martin's lemon doesn't even show up next week. Notwithstnding their apparently ill-conceived engine design, the thing that baffles me more, as nordic says, is why the damn thing doesn't handle very well, and why the CFD models don't seem to work in practice. It's not as if it's especially fast in a straight line. They don't even have the option of doing a WR; turn up the boost, tape over the ducts and see how fast it will go on the run down to Indianapolis...

Frankly, it's all a bit embarrassing, not to say disappointing for fans and team alike.

[termietermite]

What will be a shame will be if they persist with what they know is a dog and then deprive us and the next two subsitute entries on the list of the chance to see a full grid running with two different cars with a outside chance of at least finishing.

[landman]

A good discussion was held on last week's Midweek Motorsport asking how these changes might apply to Aston Martin given that they've not yet raced!