F1technical.net

I can not check anything as there arent any laptimes included

click on the race and on the "qualifying" item on the left.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85621

I thought they weren't going to make Coupe because it costs too much....

SteveH wrote:With appropriate chassis design and adequate downforce, in conjunction with properly-developed suspension the fin is completely unnecessary. The C11 Mercedes didn`t need one, and nothing at Le Mans is ever likely to eclipse it`s performance..

The Peugeot 908 qualified in 3.18 which is 13 seconds quicker than the Mercedes C11 managed in 1991.

The race pace difference is even more dramatic as the 908's were regularly ran low 3.20's with a fastest lap of 3.19, while the C11's fastest lap was 3.35.

RacingManiac wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85621

I thought they weren't going to make Coupe because it costs too much....

I guess it was too much fun and they couldn't resist

No1fan wrote:The race pace difference is even more dramatic as the 908's were regularly ran low 3.20's with a fastest lap of 3.19, while the C11's fastest lap was 3.35.

15 seconds is a lot but Audi R15's pace is a more valid comparison. 908's race pace proved very costly!

Also there have been a few changes to the circuit since '91. (I'm not saying that the Mercedes C11 is faster).

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYCelOUQk7U[/youtube]

it better not work as it looks incredibly ugly

All the new car have been pretty awkward looking with the fin....will take sometime to get used to...

Having read this article (about F1) on another post:-

http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/ ... mework.pdf

I'm surprised that the people at the AcO haven't done something similar for their top prototype category, to limit expenditure/developement on areas that don't have a direct relevance to road vehicles (specifically the aero side of the cars)


i.e:
Mandate "spec" underfloor tunnels
change the upper body rules so the cars resemble supercars rather than single seaters with covered wheels -including windscreens of a minimum size and radius of curvature.
This would also allow the cars to have styling features from their road-going stable-mates.
Also rather than being shrink-wrapped, the bodywork would be much larger -allowing ample room for the power unit -HERS, KERS etc


Something a bit like this:-

Well that is a picture of a GT car ^^
I get your point though. Prototypes shouldn't look like F1 cars with fenders. The current aero trend is to pass the air through the front of the body rather than above it. IMO that should be regulated against to retain sportscar-like image of LMPs. I'd implement a restriction of the apertures ahead of the front wheels or the windshield as well as the minimum radius rule for the bodywork between the front wheels similar to what applies to the rear of F1 sidepods. Just to avoid this kind of designs:

And get them to look more like Group C or GTP cars, but allow both open and close cockpit designs.

The whole road car looking thing is bogus. While they look nothing like road car now, the technology transfer in LMP to road car has been much more prolific than F1 has been in a long time. Both Peugeot and Audi have embraced the concept are are using it as testbed for road car usable technology. Even if ACO adapt a silhouette-like formula, they are still not going to be that relavent to road going vehicle, at least no more so than they are now. Look at Super GT now for your example. They look kinda like their road going cousins, but underneath is the same expensive bits as the LMPs....

FYI they already have spec floor, the only area of under body that has scope for development, is the area before the front axle....

That's it; a one-off super GT without the need to homologate a roadcar version...

Both Audi and Peugeot have spent a lot of money developing aerodynamics that have no other application than Le Mans... Pretty pointless really... Much better spent developing road relevant technologies... And much better for those companies' marketing departments...

RacingManiac wrote:The whole road car looking thing is bogus.

That would help to make cars more attractive for the fans without changing much technically. Let's call it beautification.

Talking of which.

Its about time they changed the DP's... Way too ugly at the moment.

Pandamasque wrote:

RacingManiac wrote:The whole road car looking thing is bogus.

That would help to make cars more attractive for the fans without changing much technically. Let's call it beautification.

Talking of which.

I could somewhat agree with that, since really even if they look like road car, whatever development on it still has no relevance to roadcar...especially with the current set of pedestrian crash reg designed car....