Grand Prix Rejects

go_Rubens wrote:This feels unnatural.

Not only the team, but look at the drivers! The Chinese F1 idol, couple of other Chinese drivers, a GP2 also-ran, Martin Brundle's son and an ex-Midland test driver!

The Dutch Bear wrote:

RealRacingRoots wrote:The Bathurst 12 is in the books. And my word, was that a race. 12 hours of some of the best racing you will ever see comes down to four tenths of a second. Craig Lowndes adds to his legendary CV by becoming one of the few people to win both The Great Race and the 12 Hour. John Bowe, Mika Salo and Peter Edwards share the podium as the German HTP squad take second in their Merc SLS, and last year's winners in Eerebus held on to a podium spot from the new fastest man around Bathurst in The Giz.

Racing does not get much better.

The best of GT3 racing and V8 Supercars joined together. 'Nuff said.

I was up at the Chase all weekend, and I must say the last three hours were unbelievably tense. That Lotus spearing off the road early on sure woke us up though

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112546

I find it very odd that Porsche went with a V4 engine for its Le Mans/WEC car. The V4 isn't used in cars for decades now more due to the costs I know, but still, it probably is an underdeveloped engine at this point. Are they trying to increase the challenge by that?

i thought they'd at least use a turbo flat six diesel at the smallest, or a redesign of the v8 they used for a short while.
this is a waaayyyyyy left field move for them. i certainly wasn't expecting it. hopefully this wing of VW-AG shows audi what's up whilst missing two cylinders

I actually could tell they were using a 4-banger thanks to this YouTube clip (or at least predict):

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cir4T3DHQY

It seems so non-Porsche. Like, it's not their character. It's not their essence and passion to use a 4 cylinder engine. It doesn't feel natural to me, and it never will. What feels natural to me, is this:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5EeUqO2hySs

That feels natural for a Porsche, as it's the type of engine that Porsche have used for many, many years. A 4 cylinder engine is very left field for them, nevertheless for anyone in the world in the LMP1-H category.

nome66 wrote:i thought they'd at least use a turbo flat six diesel at the smallest, or a redesign of the v8 they used for a short while.
this is a waaayyyyyy left field move for them. i certainly wasn't expecting it. hopefully this wing of VW-AG shows audi what's up whilst missing two cylinders

Porsche have actually been indicating that they would be developing a four cylinder engine for a few months now (and to give credit where it is due, the mulsannecorner.com website reckoned that it'd be a V4 engine back in October last year).

The suggested reason over on mulsannecorner for Porsche using a V4 is the design of the engine intakes and exhaust system, which would result in either a convoluted exhaust design or a compromised centre of gravity due to the need to raise the engine higher than the equivalent V configuration engine would be. As for the low cylinder count, that would appear to be a consequence of the desire to keep internal friction as low as possible due to the tight fuel flow restrictions (it's one reason why quite a few people are surprised that Toyota has persisted with the same V8 engine as on the TS030, albeit refined slightly, for the TS040). It might also offer some packaging advantages over an inline engine configuration too, which might explain why they didn't go for that configuration either.

To a certain extent, it would also be in keeping with some of the downsizing that has been taking place with the engines in their cars too. They are already offering a version of the Panamera with a V6 engine, and there are rumours that their LMP1 program is a branding platform to promote a hybrid version of the Panamera that might well have a four cylinder engine and a hybrid drive system incorporated into it.

mario wrote:Porsche have actually been indicating that they would be developing a four cylinder engine for a few months now (and to give credit where it is due, the mulsannecorner.com website reckoned that it'd be a V4 engine back in October last year).

The suggested reason over on mulsannecorner for Porsche using a V4 is the design of the engine intakes and exhaust system, which would result in either a convoluted exhaust design or a compromised centre of gravity due to the need to raise the engine higher than the equivalent V configuration engine would be. As for the low cylinder count, that would appear to be a consequence of the desire to keep internal friction as low as possible due to the tight fuel flow restrictions (it's one reason why quite a few people are surprised that Toyota has persisted with the same V8 engine as on the TS030, albeit refined slightly, for the TS040). It might also offer some packaging advantages over an inline engine configuration too, which might explain why they didn't go for that configuration either.

To a certain extent, it would also be in keeping with some of the downsizing that has been taking place with the engines in their cars too. They are already offering a version of the Panamera with a V6 engine, and there are rumours that their LMP1 program is a branding platform to promote a hybrid version of the Panamera that might well have a four cylinder engine and a hybrid drive system incorporated into it.

I've read somewhere that the V4 helps with the packaging of the batteries and the whole hybrid system with the goal of obtaining the best center of gravity possible. It is not why they went with 4 cylinders that bothers me. It is why they choose the V4 configuration over the straight-4 one. I mean, the 4 cyclinders, for consumption purposes is an honest bet, but V4? It is an engine that cannot be found in any single car for over 30 years, being the last one a SAAB that used a Ford V4 engines mad in Germany and an eastern manufacturer called ZAZ who used one V4 made by MeMZ until 1994. Sure, with the newest technology available maybe Porsche can get different results with them... As it seems, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with V4s except being more expensive than straight-4s.

mario wrote:

nome66 wrote:i thought they'd at least use a turbo flat six diesel at the smallest, or a redesign of the v8 they used for a short while.
this is a waaayyyyyy left field move for them. i certainly wasn't expecting it. hopefully this wing of VW-AG shows audi what's up whilst missing two cylinders

Porsche have actually been indicating that they would be developing a four cylinder engine for a few months now (and to give credit where it is due, the mulsannecorner.com website reckoned that it'd be a V4 engine back in October last year).

The suggested reason over on mulsannecorner for Porsche using a V4 is the design of the engine intakes and exhaust system, which would result in either a convoluted exhaust design or a compromised centre of gravity due to the need to raise the engine higher than the equivalent V configuration engine would be. As for the low cylinder count, that would appear to be a consequence of the desire to keep internal friction as low as possible due to the tight fuel flow restrictions (it's one reason why quite a few people are surprised that Toyota has persisted with the same V8 engine as on the TS030, albeit refined slightly, for the TS040). It might also offer some packaging advantages over an inline engine configuration too, which might explain why they didn't go for that configuration either.

To a certain extent, it would also be in keeping with some of the downsizing that has been taking place with the engines in their cars too. They are already offering a version of the Panamera with a V6 engine, and there are rumours that their LMP1 program is a branding platform to promote a hybrid version of the Panamera that might well have a four cylinder engine and a hybrid drive system incorporated into it.

with the panamera i hope they keep it 6 cylinders and up. i kinda like the way the s/c v8 sounds in that wagon of theirs

nome66 wrote:

mario wrote:

nome66 wrote:i thought they'd at least use a turbo flat six diesel at the smallest, or a redesign of the v8 they used for a short while.
this is a waaayyyyyy left field move for them. i certainly wasn't expecting it. hopefully this wing of VW-AG shows audi what's up whilst missing two cylinders

Porsche have actually been indicating that they would be developing a four cylinder engine for a few months now (and to give credit where it is due, the mulsannecorner.com website reckoned that it'd be a V4 engine back in October last year).

The suggested reason over on mulsannecorner for Porsche using a V4 is the design of the engine intakes and exhaust system, which would result in either a convoluted exhaust design or a compromised centre of gravity due to the need to raise the engine higher than the equivalent V configuration engine would be. As for the low cylinder count, that would appear to be a consequence of the desire to keep internal friction as low as possible due to the tight fuel flow restrictions (it's one reason why quite a few people are surprised that Toyota has persisted with the same V8 engine as on the TS030, albeit refined slightly, for the TS040). It might also offer some packaging advantages over an inline engine configuration too, which might explain why they didn't go for that configuration either.

To a certain extent, it would also be in keeping with some of the downsizing that has been taking place with the engines in their cars too. They are already offering a version of the Panamera with a V6 engine, and there are rumours that their LMP1 program is a branding platform to promote a hybrid version of the Panamera that might well have a four cylinder engine and a hybrid drive system incorporated into it.

with the panamera i hope they keep it 6 cylinders and up. i kinda like the way the s/c v8 sounds in that wagon of theirs

Porsche ahould stick with their V8s and Flat-6 engines. That's what makes them, unique, their Flat-6 engines. Or just 6 cylinders in general.

DanielPT wrote:

mario wrote:Porsche have actually been indicating that they would be developing a four cylinder engine for a few months now (and to give credit where it is due, the mulsannecorner.com website reckoned that it'd be a V4 engine back in October last year).

The suggested reason over on mulsannecorner for Porsche using a V4 is the design of the engine intakes and exhaust system, which would result in either a convoluted exhaust design or a compromised centre of gravity due to the need to raise the engine higher than the equivalent V configuration engine would be. As for the low cylinder count, that would appear to be a consequence of the desire to keep internal friction as low as possible due to the tight fuel flow restrictions (it's one reason why quite a few people are surprised that Toyota has persisted with the same V8 engine as on the TS030, albeit refined slightly, for the TS040). It might also offer some packaging advantages over an inline engine configuration too, which might explain why they didn't go for that configuration either.

To a certain extent, it would also be in keeping with some of the downsizing that has been taking place with the engines in their cars too. They are already offering a version of the Panamera with a V6 engine, and there are rumours that their LMP1 program is a branding platform to promote a hybrid version of the Panamera that might well have a four cylinder engine and a hybrid drive system incorporated into it.

I've read somewhere that the V4 helps with the packaging of the batteries and the whole hybrid system with the goal of obtaining the best center of gravity possible. It is not why they went with 4 cylinders that bothers me. It is why they choose the V4 configuration over the straight-4 one. I mean, the 4 cyclinders, for consumption purposes is an honest bet, but V4? It is an engine that cannot be found in any single car for over 30 years, being the last one a SAAB that used a Ford V4 engines mad in Germany and an eastern manufacturer called ZAZ who used one V4 made by MeMZ until 1994. Sure, with the newest technology available maybe Porsche can get different results with them... As it seems, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with V4s except being more expensive than straight-4s.

Production wise, it's true that the automotive industry have tended to bypass the V4 engine format in recent years mainly on cost ground, and I think that it is also slightly easier to sort out the mechanical balance on an inline four cylinder engine too. However, V4 engines are still reasonably popular on production motorcycles (where packaging concerns are tighter), so there are areas where the V4 engine is a viable alternative.

As an aside, I wonder if the choice of a V4 engine is in part influenced by the VW Group purchasing Ducati in 2012, which they said was a move aimed at harnessing their experience in compact and lightweight engines? Ducati's MotoGP bikes have tended to use a V4 engine format in recent years, so perhaps they might have used this as an opportunity to tap into their experience.

As an aside, the one that does confuse me a little is the fact that, given the new regulations put a hard limit on fuel flow rates, why Toyota have stuck with the same normally aspirated, relatively large capacity (3.4L) V8 engine. They have chosen to eschew the trend amongst most manufacturers to reduce the cylinder count to cut back on internal friction and pumping losses and have opted against forced induction too, which is a little surprising.

Because there ain't no replace, for cubic displacement!

wsrgo wrote:Calado set for WEC GTE Pro drive with Ferrari

Good choice by Ferrari!

That is a somewhat ugly front end on the Toyota TS040. But on the other hand, the car with the ERS in use apparently gets close to 1000bhp.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113112

I like the idea of stupidly powerful racing cars again. Even with the new technology, it seems like a return to a bygone era.

they should have stuck with red on white liveries.

also, could you imagine this thing's v10 paired with a KERS setup? powaahhhh

IIRC, the TSO40's V8 and hybrid power systems will produce something like 1100hp

roblomas52 wrote:IIRC, the TSO40's V8 and hybrid power systems will produce something like 1100hp

I read 986bhp. Where did you get 1100bhp?

[quote="go_Rubens"]

It's so chunky, it's almost kawaii.

go_Rubens wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:IIRC, the TSO40's V8 and hybrid power systems will produce something like 1100hp

I read 986bhp. Where did you get 1100bhp?

It could be a confusion with the quoted power output in Pferdestärke, or metric horsepower, which gives a slightly higher value (although that would only give a power output of 1000 PS).

go_Rubens wrote:

That is a somewhat ugly front end on the Toyota TS040. But on the other hand, the car with the ERS in use apparently gets close to 1000bhp.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/113112

I like the idea of stupidly powerful racing cars again. Even with the new technology, it seems like a return to a bygone era.

It's interesting that a few outfits have opted for a similar design for the front end of the car - Porsche have gone for a similar "upright" design too.

Anyone wondering where Fabio Leimer went?

Here.

mario wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:IIRC, the TSO40's V8 and hybrid power systems will produce something like 1100hp

I read 986bhp. Where did you get 1100bhp?

It could be a confusion with the quoted power output in Pferdestärke, or metric horsepower, which gives a slightly higher value (although that would only give a power output of 1000 PS).

.

Makes you wonder how good the Audi chassis is, because there's no way the diesel is making 1000bhp right? Torque, certainly, but a 1000 horsepower from a diesel, nah.

mario wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:

roblomas52 wrote:IIRC, the TSO40's V8 and hybrid power systems will produce something like 1100hp

I read 986bhp. Where did you get 1100bhp?

It could be a confusion with the quoted power output in Pferdestärke, or metric horsepower, which gives a slightly higher value (although that would only give a power output of 1000 PS).

.

Damn, I appear to have read the near 1100hp from an article somewhere on the TSO30

Wallio wrote:Makes you wonder how good the Audi chassis is, because there's no way the diesel is making 1000bhp right? Torque, certainly, but a 1000 horsepower from a diesel, nah.

Audi have not officially said what the power output of the R18 is (in fact, I don't think they've ever released an official power output for any of their cars) - the diesel engine is probably producing a comparable amount of power to Toyota's V8 engine, if not perhaps slightly more powerful.
I think that I recall a figure of 550bhp being flung around in 2013 due to the fact that Audi were able to crank up the turbo pressure (their fuel efficiency seemed to have dropped by about 20% as a result of running much higher boost pressures and a richer mixture in 2013 to compensate for the slightly smaller air restrictors they were allowed to use).

As to the electrical power unit, once again Audi have not revealed what sort of hybrid power train they will actually use, only that they have opted for the lowest energy recovery class (2MJ) for manufacturers on the grounds that their thermal energy recovery system would, due to its weight and the lower energy of the exhaust gases, be detrimental to performance. The electrical motors could have a comparable peak power output to Toyota's systems, but in reality they've probably opted for a less powerful system they can use throughout the whole lap rather than a more powerful system that can only be used for part of the lap.

As an aside, it should be strictly noted that Toyota's figures are theoretical maximum combined power outputs, which will not necessarily be the case in practise (the maximum efficiency and power outputs of the electric motors and internal combustion engines are unlikely to occur at the same time - the creation of a back EMF at high rpm's tends to reduce the efficiency of electrical motors such that they are going to be most effective at lower speeds, whilst the V8 engine would be most efficient at full load (i.e. at higher speed and full throttle)).

is anyone from F1 Rejects Listener Land at the 6 hours of Spa on the 2/3 of May ?
does Eric van de Poele still race (or more precisely: win) there?

btw I am a Swiss, temporarily working for a Liechtenstein bank in Luxemburg - how much more european microstate can you get ?
I am so disappointed that there's no statue for Heini Mader in Liechtenstein and none for Bertrand Gachot in Luxemburg ;-(

Jocke1 wrote:Is there anywhere online where you are able to see how much a driver has driven in any one race?
Le Mans, Endurance races, GT races etc...races where there are more than one driver sharing the cockpit.
Rarely have I seen sources providing the number of laps / hours spent in the car divided by driver.
They always just show the final results like this, without individual laps or stats:



There are several series where I'd like to know how much the drivers have driven individually.
Like ADAC GT Masters, Blancpain Endurance Series, Audi R8 LMS, 24h Nürburgring, FIA GT1 World Championship, Le Mans 24h & the Le Mans Series.

Is there a place dedicated to this that I haven't found?

^^

That was a decent race.

Arguably the most memorable WEC podium in a while. Toyota 1-2, and Webber finishes his return race to sportscars in 3rd. Both Audis retire. My dad and I were quite pleased.

Huge start crash at todays race in ADAC GT Masters.
http://youtu.be/f9DULawWNvQ

I went to the ADAC GT Masters website to see the results of the two races this weekend.
And it's really annoying to see the two-driver team results and not knowing how many laps each driver made individually,
as broken down per team.

Am I really the only one pining for these kinds of very simple stats from ADAC, Le Mans etc?
I'm baffled that in this day and age this simple task of keeping track of the drivers laps is not performed.
Has there ever been like an official statement why not? Or ever been put up as a suggestion in any series?

The new Rebellion is seen in it's grand new form.



That's a great looking car in my eyes. And it looks fast.

It'll be interesting to see how it holds up to the hybrids, but with no competition, I can't help but feel a bit sorry for Rebellion. It would be nice to see another privateer or two come up from the seriously congested LMP2 and into LMP1.

AndreaModa wrote:It'll be interesting to see how it holds up to the hybrids, but with no competition, I can't help but feel a bit sorry for Rebellion. It would be nice to see another privateer or two come up from the seriously congested LMP2 and into LMP1.

I don't quite like that either. But no privateers to bother them gives them an easy rabbit to chase, that being the factory teams. At least they're getting closer.

what sort of powerplant is in the Rebellion this season?

nome66 wrote:what sort of powerplant is in the Rebellion this season?

Same Toyota V8s as last year.

Rebellion did a reasonable job in qualifying, situation considered. I think they achieved their goals. With more testing and development, it could be fast.

Congratulations to Porsche for their pole position in LMP1. They got the timing just right, and it paid greatly.

http://motorsportstalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... e-to-wait/

Nissan is in! With an LMP1 version of the GTR? OK, weird, but still 4 Factory LMP1 teams next year? How epic is that?

Wallio wrote:http://motorsportstalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/23/nissan-confirms-lmp1-program-for-2015-fia-wec-car-reveal-will-have-to-wait/

Nissan is in! With an LMP1 version of the GTR? OK, weird, but still 4 Factory LMP1 teams next year? How epic is that?

I so can't wait for next season now!

Wallio wrote:http://motorsportstalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/23/nissan-confirms-lmp1-program-for-2015-fia-wec-car-reveal-will-have-to-wait/

Nissan is in! With an LMP1 version of the GTR? OK, weird, but still 4 Factory LMP1 teams next year? How epic is that?

They have been dropping some pretty heavy hints that they would be joining the LMP1 field - they even outright stated that their 'Garage 56' entry this year running a prototype powertrain for their prospective LMP1 entry, so that in itself is not a surprise.

As for the comment about the 'LMP1 version of the GT-R', much of that sounds like marketing waffle to try to create a tenuous link between their motorsport division and their road going division. The only way that I can possibly see a link between the two would be if Nissan chose to base the engine for their LMP1 car off the "VR" series engine that the production version of the GT-R currently uses - Nissan has already gained experience in converting the VK series engine into an LMP2 engine (as the ACO's regulations state that LMP2 engines have to be derived from existing production engines), so it is a possible route by which they might try to claim a link.

[EDIT] Autosport are also reporting the same press conference, but they are reporting that Nissan have been much bolder in their statements than the NBC article suggests - they are quoting Andy Palmer as claiming that Nissan believe they will win the 2016 24 Hours of Le Mans:

"I knew what we wanted to do nine months ago: the question was whether doing that could we be competitive and could we win," he explained.

"It was March before we had enough data to say, yes we can be credible in 2015 and we can win this thing in 2016."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114091

Now, it is one thing to be confident and to set ambitious goals, but surely quite another when you openly state that "we are going to win" in a very short timeframe - that sounds like a statement that has considerable potential to backfire. Furthermore, it seems that Nissan are only committed to the LMP1 class for the next two years - which, when read in conjunction with their earlier statement, almost makes it sound as if Nissan might possibly walk away after two years if they don't win the 24 Hours of Le Mans in that timeframe.

If Nissan were to believe that they could win in such a short timeframe and pull out if they don't, they'd be nuts. It's already nuts that they go out saying they'll win the 2016 Le Mans 24 Hours. All they are setting up for in my eyes are a "failure" where they'll ruin their reputation by simply expecting too much. It feels as if the team is being driven by an oversized ego.

Meanwhile, the test day has been said and done, and Toyota, based on the results, must be the favorites to win. They have the pace. They have the fuel efficiency. They have the drivers. They have the reliability. My bet is on the reject trio. Audi look competitive, but only for a podium. Porsche look like they need straight line speed, which may be why they're not so close to Toyota as they have been along with Audi.

The 1000bhp of the TS040 seems to really help them here.

go_Rubens wrote:If Nissan were to believe that they could win in such a short timeframe and pull out if they don't, they'd be nuts. It's already nuts that they go out saying they'll win the 2016 Le Mans 24 Hours. All they are setting up for in my eyes are a "failure" where they'll ruin their reputation by simply expecting too much. It feels as if the team is being driven by an oversized ego.

Meanwhile, the test day has been said and done, and Toyota, based on the results, must be the favorites to win. They have the pace. They have the fuel efficiency. They have the drivers. They have the reliability. My bet is on the reject trio. Audi look competitive, but only for a podium. Porsche look like they need straight line speed, which may be why they're not so close to Toyota as they have been along with Audi.

The 1000bhp of the TS040 seems to really help them here.

It's only a mere 250bhp more than the Porsche

roblomas52 wrote:

go_Rubens wrote:If Nissan were to believe that they could win in such a short timeframe and pull out if they don't, they'd be nuts. It's already nuts that they go out saying they'll win the 2016 Le Mans 24 Hours. All they are setting up for in my eyes are a "failure" where they'll ruin their reputation by simply expecting too much. It feels as if the team is being driven by an oversized ego.

Meanwhile, the test day has been said and done, and Toyota, based on the results, must be the favorites to win. They have the pace. They have the fuel efficiency. They have the drivers. They have the reliability. My bet is on the reject trio. Audi look competitive, but only for a podium. Porsche look like they need straight line speed, which may be why they're not so close to Toyota as they have been along with Audi.

The 1000bhp of the TS040 seems to really help them here.

It's only a mere 250bhp more than the Porsche

Yeah, that partially explains why Porsche weren't the fastest in testing and were a couple of seconds off. It just doesn't have the power to compete with Toyota. I don't think Audi does either.