2016 Le Mans 24 Hours - 15th to 19th June 2016

  • Thread starter Furinkazen
  • 3,302 comments
  • 149,102 views
BoneSawTX
Because it's false and never happened. Go look at the lap totals Corvette racked up and overall finish position in their GT1 wins. They were ridiculous.
Click to expand...
That's not entirely correct, years ago corvette used to pit the car and clean it because they had a lead so far ahead in class so the car was nice and clean for the finish although that is going back to C5R days iirc.
 
Holdenhsvgtsr
That's not entirely correct, years ago corvette used to pit the car and clean it because they had a lead so far ahead in class so the car was nice and clean for the finish although that is going back to C5R days iirc.
Click to expand...

@BoneSawTX that was usually Corvette vs a couple Vipers and... that was it.
 
Really gutted for Toyota. I know the race is 24 hours and tough luck if you can't make it for the last 1 minute, but it's still pretty heartbreaking to come so close, yet so far. Added to the injury is the DSQ as well, and how many times in previous history have they come so close to winning and failed :(

I'm gonna take the TS030 around Le Mans 24 Minutes in GT6 and win it in their honour. Keep fighting guys, one day all the stars will align and you will win it for sure 👍👍
 
I think Peter Dumbreck said nobody remembers the car that finished 2nd. In 99% of the cases this is true, but in the fashion that Toyota just decided to stop working literally with one foot across the finish line, I think people will remember this Le Mans for the car that finished 2nd. (I'll still say this car finished, to hell with ACO rules on this).

And I really hope this really gives fuel for the Toyota engineers to thoroughly engineer a reliable car. They have the speed for sure. They have the drivers, and they have the team. They just need a car that can go the distance and then some. And they almost did. But it's been far too long where the words "Toyota" and "almost" are put in the same sentence at Le Mans.
 
trustjab
I mean, saying things like Toyota didnt have what it takes and trying to play down their competitiveness is off-putting imo.
Click to expand...

Toyota deserves much respect for their competitiveness while it lasted, nothing more in my opinion. Saying they had what it takes is like downplaying Porsche's achievement and letting emotions overshadow the harsh reality of endurance racing.
 
sumbrownkid
And I really hope this really gives fuel for the Toyota engineers to thoroughly engineer a reliable car.
Click to expand...
It was rock solid reliable for 99.9% of the race. Saying the car is unreliable because it finally had an issue with 1 lap to go is not giving them enough credit. It's an endurance race, parts fail. Those that make it to the end with no issues are nothing but lucky.
 
Hun200kmh
The pace of the recovery that Toyota did that morning (after the lead BMW crashed) indicated that the remaining BMW was going to get caught. We will never know of course .... but ....

... you (sort of) proved my point. Maybe not everyone knows, but many people know about the 1999 race and the Toyota's misfortune that year.
Click to expand...
On your first point, absolutely correct; Katayamm set a crazy lap record for the race catching the BMW.

On to your 2nd point, I think said lap record plays a large contributing factor to why people remember Toyota falling short. They remember Toyota leading a hell charge for the win only to be stopped by the puncture.

But, I believe someone pointed out that prior to the TS020, Toyota had been denied a close victory by fate before 1999. I think that contributes a little to TheCracker's post as well.
 
R1600Turbo
It was rock solid reliable for 99.9% of the race. Saying the car is unreliable because it finally had an issue with 1 lap to go is not giving them enough credit. It's an endurance race, parts fail. Those that make it to the end with no issues are nothing but lucky.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between reliable, and thoroughly reliable. To Toyota, the engineers, I'm sure they will say it was unreliable when the moment called for it unfortunately. I know this car is perhaps one of the best cars on the grid. But they need to get luck, and I'm not sure if that's something the engineers can design, build, and test.
 
sumbrownkid
There's a difference between reliable, and thoroughly reliable. To Toyota, the engineers, I'm sure they will say it was unreliable when the moment called for it unfortunately. I know this car is perhaps one of the best cars on the grid. But they need to get luck, and I'm not sure if that's something the engineers can design, build, and test.
Click to expand...
This is like purchasing a new car, owning it for 10 years, having one thing go wrong with it in all that time, and calling it unreliable. I don't think unreliable is the word you are looking for.

Edit: Plus, isn't this car all new?
 
Last edited:
R1600Turbo
This is like purchasing a new car, owning it for 10 years, having one thing go wrong with it in all that time, and calling it unreliable. I don't think unreliable is the word you are looking for.

Edit: Plus, isn't this car all new?
Click to expand...
The car was designed for the 3.4L V8 but they changed to the turbo V6 and had to adapt it to the current design.
 
R1600Turbo
This is like purchasing a new car, owning it for 10 years, having one thing go wrong with it in all that time, and calling it unreliable. I don't think unreliable is the word you are looking for.

Edit: Plus, isn't this car all new?
Click to expand...

Well perhaps not but when the moment called for it, that's the only word I can describe it as. To me unlucky is a puncture, a fuel delivery system at the pit not working, or a wheel gun going bust.
 
They had issues with one of the cars in the Silverstone 6 hours, both cars failed at the Spa 6 hours, and they had issues again at Le Mans.

Reliability isn't their strong point with that car so far. Being a new car isn't an excuse either.

It's got the pace, but it breaks. Which just happens to put them in a better position than they were a year ago when they were nowhere to be seen in regards to pace.
 
I'm kind of shocked that so many people posting in this thread don't seem to understand what endurance racing is. Porsche shouldn't have been celebrating so hard because they were only lucky? WTF does that even mean?

Hun200kmh
True to a degree, but these exceptional events usually take many years to fade from the collective memory of racing fans. 1999 was 17 years ago and yet everyone (here) knows about the tyre blow up that denied the TS020's victory.
Click to expand...
Everyone knows about the tire blow up in 1999 because that was (the tailend of) a somewhat famous era for Le Mans, and the TS020 was (behind perhaps the various iterations of the Mercedes) probably the most famous of all of them.

Now, I think this finish will go down in history as well, but it's kind of an apples/oranges thing.
 
ROAD_DOGG33J
Yeah, but I did find his interview from that race and he sounded like a total knob.
Click to expand...

He apologized for it though. I can't remember if it was on Twitter or during an actual interview, but he actually did apologize for it.
 
It'll go down in history that Porsche won back to back.

No one cares who finishes 2nd or how it happened once it's all said and done.

Toyota still don't have what it takes to win, even though at this point they more than deserve to.
 
I watched a good bit of the race but missed a majority of the second half, and I've just now fully caught up with this thread. Such a shame for Toyota. Their lead car was running just about perfectly the whole race and showed no signs of mechanical failure, honestly I don't even think Toyota can be fully blamed - I think it was a show of how cruel and cold-hearted nature and chance can be. I was only rooting for them this race in hopes that someone would finally kick the Germans/VAG off the throne, but now I'll definitely be rooting for them next year so they can earn the victory that was cut short this year. I've taken likings to a number of brands based on their origins and history that pre-dates me, but this may be the first time I've come to appreciate a brand through a present-day history-in-the-making that I've experienced myself.

Porsche kept pace all 24 hours and their victory was absolutely well deserved, but it was hollow knowing how close Toyota was. I don't think there should be any bad air held between the two brands at any level, though.
 
I don't like how people are tossing around "disqualified" when talking about Toyota. They were not DQ'd, they were not classified as they did not meet the grounds for classification. Being disqualified says that the car in question did something bad, something that would call for the stewards to remove them from the race as a form of punishment. Toyota did nothing wrong, their car just broke down at the worst possible time. They were very sporting and have no reason to be DQ'd, unless they find something on the 6 car post-race.

Disqualified (DSQ): The stewards removed the car in question as a form of punishment.
Not classified (NC): Didn't meet grounds of classification, simply.
 

Similar threads

Famine
24 Hours of Le Mans 2024 Entry List Announced: Nine Hypercar Marques in Record-Breaking Field
Replies
17
Views
4K
TexHill
TexHill
Famine
24 Hours of Le Mans 2023 Entry List Revealed for Centenary Race: 16 Hypercars Lead the Way
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
jonoholland29
jonoholland29
Famine
Aston Martin Confirms its Valkyrie Hypercar Will Race at Le Mans in 2025
Replies
19
Views
4K
Fezzik
Fezzik
Famine
2021 Le Mans 24 Hours: Streams, Links, and Discussion
5 6 7
Replies
181
Views
12K
JackRyanWMU
JackRyanWMU
Famine
2022 Le Mans 24 Hours: Preview, Live Streams, Schedules and Discussion
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
9K
Coquico
Coquico

Latest Posts

Back