LMS round2 - 1000km de Spa 2010

[RacingManiac]

I like he pointed out I think what was suspected by most, that PAG is basically a much bigger team than any petrol team and spending more money thus have a much faster car. Diesel is just a part of it....

IMO the rules had always been balanced after maybe 2007, but no one is spending on Audi or Peugeot's kind of money.....

There's a very interesting interview of Ant on autosport:

Q & A with Anthony Davidson

It's fascinating how open and communicative the top drivers can be as soon as they are relieved from all the PR obligations from F1. Reading that interview you can really feel he's sincere and open about his racing experience, whilst reading any F1 driver interview will make you feel you've already read it tons of times, and that it was written by a PR doctor...

I agree the comparison will be very hard to make between an R15 in LM config and a 908 in sprint trim... But I'd be surprised if Peugeot ran all three cars on the same spec. Sure some drivers will have to race in lower DF settings to guauge the Audi.

It's a bit sad that so much entrants had to withdraw their entry or didn't even postulate (AMR,Oreca AIM, Beechdean Mansell, WR...) The good thing is that they all will be at LM. The saddest thing is the lack of Pescarolos, but I have to refrain speaking about that or my mood will get down...

[dumrick]

Wonderful Peugeot 1-2, the Pugs are just too fast for the Audis when the track isn't completely dry, as it's been usual.

The Ginetta-Zytek from ASM won P2, the #77 Felbermayr-Proton Porsche was 1st in GT2 and the VDS Ford GT won GT1.

Full results here

[Pandamasque]

Usually Audis are better in the wet actually. This time they had a lot less DF in their setup.

[Skinn3r55]

Audi declared that they brought the cars to Spa with the setup for Le Mans, so its rather normal they'd be slower.

[vyselegend]

On that topic I suspect the reason why Audi could afford running LM setup competitively and Peugeot couldn't, is because the R15 in LM trim has better DF/Drag ratio. I think the 908 would have laked DF too much if they ran LM nose.

It's just an uneducated guess, or call it gut feeling, but I believe so.
When asked why they didn't run LM setup like Audi, Famin told it was because they prefered to risk damaging a sprint nose rather than an LM one. But I don't believe it. Sure they must remember 2008 when they fell short of parts because of too many crashes, but with four 908 running at Spa, they certainly could afford trying that setup on one of them.
They didn't, because either none of the drivers was willing to, or they simply knew they couldn't manage a competitive pace at Spa in low DF trim...

We'll get the answear in a month, but I bet the R15 will have both straight line and aglity advantages in La Sarthe...

Anyway congratulations to every class winners and podium finishers. Just realised the leading GT2 Porsche finished a lap clear ahead of the first GT1! But I didn't realise it enough to know if it's because of genuine pace or because of those strange new SC rules though...

[Skinn3r55]

On that topic I suspect the reason why Audi could afford running LM setup competitively and Peugeot couldn't, is because the R15 in LM trim has better DF/Drag ratio. I think the 908 would have laked DF too much if they ran LM nose.

It's just an uneducated guess, or call it gut feeling, but I believe so.
When asked why they didn't run LM setup like Audi, Famin told it was because they prefered to risk damaging a sprint nose rather than an LM one. But I don't believe it. Sure they must remember 2008 when they fell short of parts because of too many crashes, but with four 908 running at Spa, they certainly could afford trying that setup on one of them.
They didn't, because either none of the drivers was willing to, or they simply knew they couldn't manage a competitive pace at Spa in low DF trim...

We'll get the answear in a month, but I bet the R15 will have both straight line and aglity advantages in La Sarthe...

Anyway congratulations to every class winners and podium finishers. Just realised the leading GT2 Porsche finished a lap clear ahead of the first GT1! But I didn't realise it enough to know if it's because of genuine pace or because of those strange new SC rules though...

Very good point. The Audi guys said they focused a lot on areo efficiency(could have significant effect on fuel consumption as well). I also think I heard that Peugeot want to fight for the Le Mans intercontinental cup( which makes it compulsory they race at Silverstone and Shanghai but I'm really unsure about it so I might just be talking absolute crap) and they don't have the budget for it yet. So perhaps Peugeot had to win this to get the shareholders to allow the budget( again just a wild guess).

[dumrick]

Usually Audis are better in the wet actually. This time they had a lot less DF in their setup.

I strongly disagree. Ever since the improvement of the TC on the Peugeots (after LM 2008), Peugeot has been beating soundly the R15 whenever the track isn't dry. Sure, the low DF the Audis had today didn't help, but at Petit last year they still had the "street racer" ultra-high DF kit on and it was the same story. When you say "Audis are better in the wet" you must be thinking about the R10 and referring to a couple years ago.

On that topic I suspect the reason why Audi could afford running LM setup competitively and Peugeot couldn't, is because the R15 in LM trim has better DF/Drag ratio. I think the 908 would have laked DF too much if they ran LM nose.

Well, the top speed difference between the Audis and the Peugeot has been around 4-6km/h all weekend. With the extra power the Audi reportedly has and with low downforce, that's a bit disappointing. Furthermore, the Audis remain thirstier than the 908's.

with four 908 running at Spa, they certainly could afford trying that setup on one of them

What would be the point of running a car in suboptimal conditions? To compare with suboptimal Audis? That comparison would never be translated to Le Mans pace, because Spa is a different animal.

Concerning the reason Audi ran in low DF configuration, I'm pretty sure that was because that's the only R15+ body kit they have. They ran it at Paul Ricard and in all the tests, so it's easy to understand that it is the only configuration (at least until after LM) they have available.

Pdf's with full results, all lap times, top speeds, pitstops and all info can be obtained here

Just realised the leading GT2 Porsche finished a lap clear ahead of the first GT1! But I didn't realise it enough to know if it's because of genuine pace or because of those strange new SC rules though...

There is little difference left pace-wise this year between the GT2's and the "new" GT1's. Add to that that some GT2's (Ferrari and Porsche) are real racing machines, while GT1's are now a "performance-balanced class"


Lastly, I can't help mention Stephane Sarrazin and the way he drove, to get 50 seconds back from Tom Kristensen in just 20 minutes (about 10 laps of Spa...). To see him swerving through the traffic like it wasn't even moving was magic (ask the guy in the LMP2 Pescarolo that suddently realised a Peugeot was squeezing through, already biting the grass...).

[dumrick]

Delicate conditions on the formation lap, after a shower, Andre Lotterer managing to compromise the race even before the start:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2Jrwvr5HBw[/youtube]

Race start:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTHyk6Y3ZSE[/youtube]

Accident of the #2 Peugeot. Despite having to pit for new front and back end, including crash boxes, the car finished second and spent less time on the pits than any of the Audis!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iO7wPCGMqc[/youtube]

A nice video of the race, courtesy of Michelin:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoaOHykOInw[/youtube]

[Pandamasque]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOMDO2b00HM[/youtube]

[vyselegend]

Usually Audis are better in the wet actually. This time they had a lot less DF in their setup.

I strongly disagree. Ever since the improvement of the TC on the Peugeots (after LM 2008), Peugeot has been beating soundly the R15 whenever the track isn't dry. Sure, the low DF the Audis had today didn't help, but at Petit last year they still had the "street racer" ultra-high DF kit on and it was the same story. When you say "Audis are better in the wet" you must be thinking about the R10 and referring to a couple years ago.

I wouldn't be as categoric, but I agree the 908 is probably not as bad in the wet as it could seem. At Petit 2009, and to some extent even during LM 2008, the 908 was actually OK in the wet (when conditions required full wet tyres without ambiguity), but struggled badly to find grip in mixed or drying conditions. Although if you look closely it isn't a clear picture but more of a circumstances depending game.

In 2008 LM the team admited having a poor TC as you said, which, coupled to the tremendeous torque of the diesel, made it comprehensively undriveable in the rain. (if you've read Davidson's interview posted earlier he seems to say their TC still feels bad btw)

PLM 2009 is another story IMO, because tyres rules in ALMS are different, and doesn't allow the use of intermediates. The Peugeot crew, lacking the level of experience Audi has of ALMS racing, was unprepared to the situation (running full wets on semi-dry/ drying track), and hadn't any set-up pre-defined for that case. If you remember, as soon as the track got really wet (the last hour before they red flagged it), the Peugeot actually became faster than the Audi, and it was the R15 which seemed the most uneasy indeed.

On that topic I suspect the reason why Audi could afford running LM setup competitively and Peugeot couldn't, is because the R15 in LM trim has better DF/Drag ratio. I think the 908 would have laked DF too much if they ran LM nose.

Well, the top speed difference between the Audis and the Peugeot has been around 4-6km/h all weekend. With the extra power the Audi reportedly has and with low downforce, that's a bit disappointing. Furthermore, the Audis remain thirstier than the 908's.

I can't argue much with that, as I said it's a gut feeling and not a wise analysis of facts. Just, by experience, remember that Audi are masters when it comes to play the mind games, and thinking they showed their true pace today(even for that given package/track compromise) would be silly.

Peugeot drivers are allowed to use the "boost" button approximatively every three laps (and during qualy obviously) acording to Minassian (he didn't say how much they can use it during those laps though). That's not very surprising since that engine is now proven, reliable on several 32 hours simulations, so they can pull on it.
It certainly play a part in their pace (the question is how much ).

While Audi's V10 is in it's second year only, and in a totally new environement (because the R15 plus engine bay radically differs to the old R15 one, according to Ralph Juttner). So I'm pretty sure they can't play with engine power as confidently as Peugeot does. For the moment...

But the seemingly worst consumption level is playing against them, agreed. Maybe it has to do with their cooling problems from last year. I don't kow if the principle is the same as for petrol engines, where you can improve cooling with a richer mix...?

with four 908 running at Spa, they certainly could afford trying that setup on one of them

What would be the point of running a car in suboptimal conditions? To compare with suboptimal Audis? That comparison would never be translated to Le Mans pace, because Spa is a different animal.

Concerning the reason Audi ran in low DF configuration, I'm pretty sure that was because that's the only R15+ body kit they have. They ran it at Paul Ricard and in all the tests, so it's easy to understand that it is the only configuration (at least until after LM) they have available.

Seen like that, well, it's the most credible explaination. It's true that we haven't seen the R15 plus in another configuration.

Thanks for the vids mates! I still owe you the Castellet clip I promised btw. I shall find the time to mount it sooner or later...

[dumrick]

I wouldn't be as categoric, but I agree the 908 is probably not as bad in the wet as it could seem. At Petit 2009, and to some extent even during LM 2008, the 908 was actually OK in the wet (when conditions required full wet tyres without ambiguity)...

I must confess I missed some of the early stages of PLM2009. That only would justify the different perceptions me and Pandamasque have. The part I remember better was after rain came pouring and the Peugeots started catching and going by the Audis, when these were struggling and spinning around.

The justification you presented for the problems at PLM makes a lot of sense and reinforces my perception.

Just, by experience, remember that Audi are masters when it comes to play the mind games, and thinking they showed their true pace today(even for that given package/track compromise) would be silly.

Peugeot drivers are allowed to use the "boost" button approximatively every three laps (and during qualy obviously) acording to Minassian...

...Audi's V10 is in it's second year only, and in a totally new environement (because the R15 plus engine bay radically differs to the old R15 one, according to Ralph Juttner). So I'm pretty sure they can't play with engine power as confidently as Peugeot does.

I'm really sceptic (always...) concerning the apparent simplism of some of the things we have taken for fact, in the high/low downforce debate and the "boost" explanations.

First, I really would expect the top speed difference to be higher. In Paul Ricard the Audi topped 331km/h and Peugeot 325km/h - 6km/h difference. At Spa, the Audis reached about 310km/h and the Peugeots 304km/h - the same 6km/h difference. Of course, a 6km/h difference is a bigger difference at slower top speeds, but is Peugeot's Le Mans configuration (as used by Oreca au Castellet) worth that little - a mere 0,9% difference And if you consider that the alleged higher downforce of the Peugeot would allow it to go faster through Le Radillon than its adversary, the data available just gets more confusing.

Second, let's analyse this race's best sector data:
- 1st sector: Peugeot faster by 0,116"
- 2nd sector: Peugeot faster by 1,238"
- 3rd sector: Audi faster by 0,225"

A big difference in the technical middle sector - proving that the Audi really runs with low downforce? Anyway, even if the Audis were running with low boost, they still managed to be faster and thirstier than the Peugeots...
Audi claims to have worked on not losing power with the new restrictor - they were down on Peugeot last year - and Peugeot admitted at Sebring that the performance lost through the Winter seemed to be offset by a significant consumption gain.

Another thing: given the open-cockpit configuration and still-blunt nose, I believe that the R15+ is still draggier than the 908 and...

...actually, higher base drag (not setup dependent) and a more powerful engine than the Peugeot, coupled with a very low downforce pack would explain a lot - why Audi's top speed is higher, but not by much; why the R15+ seems so thirsty; why it lost so much time for the 908 between Rivage and Stavelot and why Audi seems the first team - all classes combined - to change for inters at the slighest sight of rain.

And it's true, we are waiting for a long time for that clip

[Pandamasque]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saBYoN_oT7U[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwfdViqEPAM[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hmk41hetaqM[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lx4uHWeQEYQ[/youtube]