The Le Mans General Discussion Thread

[sk8er913]

The Dauer 962 Le Mans, a slightly modified 962C entered by Porsche at Le Mans in '94 as the GT1 version of Dauer's 962 based road supercar. Won Le Mans outright with another losing second place in an absurdly close finish with Irvine's Toyota.

I don't remember, that was before my birthdate. Did they enter 95 and 96 too? why did they quit?

The Fuzzy car in Question was the Toyota GT-One, where its Boot/Trunk(Which had to exist under the regulations)was it's Fuel tank and that there is no known Registered Road cars, this by comparison wasn't fuzzy in the slightest.

that is fuzzy. O.o lol. The Porsche is like a 12 pixel Image of Pluto and the Toyota is like an 8 pixel image of Charon. XD

 

[Holdenhsvgtsr]

The Fuzzy car in Question was the Toyota GT-One, where its Boot/Trunk(Which had to exist under the regulations)was it's Fuel tank and that there is no known Registered Road cars, this by comparison wasn't fuzzy in the slightest.

 

[sk8er913]

Nice car... lol

 

[mustafur]

Is that the one currently in Toyotas Museum?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I have no idea how ride heights make cars look better unless you're talking low riders vs. the trucks I see in Alabama

Didn't say that, go back and read it again. Actually I'll save you the trouble, what I said is in a general sense the cars of yesteryear are not that different than the modern era. You have the same aero tricks being employed, same overall look as far as ride height and overall silhouette goes. How these are somehow more ugly...is beyond me. Clearly people don't remember 92 when the aero regs for Group C were very horrendous. But hey if you people like triple tier or quadruple tier rear wings...that's all you.

I don't know many people who would say this

looks better than this:

Well those are the same people (like you) that are stuck in eras. The type that checks conservative cause the idea of a change of any kind is just weird and hard to grasp. The types that have trouble finding beauty between era to era cause of the myopic illness they suffer (still waiting for CDC to recognize it ). Those are the types that love chicken Sunday-Saturday cause it's simple and easy to take down.

Me I see the beauty on equivalent terms in different ways between the early 90s cars, the late 90s, early to mid 00s and current. There are many reasons for that though.

What is meant by that is keeping costs down to roughly what a privateer GT class would be.

Um once again, you're wrong where are you getting this from. A Privateer GTE/LM car is still going to cost more than the 450k you spend in a DP or even NASCAR. The GT3 run anywhere from 200k-500k depending on what you buy. And @Kamuifanboy just gave info that helps me prove this even further so... Operational costs of the entire set up may be different but start up costs...it's cheaper to throw your hat in the TUSC DP ring then it is the ELMS/ALMS/WEC privateer ring and that's GT or LMP. (not counting LMP3 which is suppose to be the cheap solution).

Hard to not make up opinions

That's cute, but saying that LMP2 is the foreign version of DP without the V8, (paraphrase) is no longer an opinion when you start stating unfounded truths...rather wrongs then unfounded truths. Considering that LMP2 has what could be called a majority of cars running V8s. So yes you were wrong and making stuff up as you go once again about things that aren't NASCAR or more importantly DP related.

I still prefer the CLK.
... how do I made spoiler tags?

and yes GT1 cars were pretty got they all had a serious flaw... When I searched CLR GT1... These were the results. I wasn't going to post it. but I cant resist it. XD

@ProjectWHaT I posted the same picture but I removed it. lol the Porsche was "beautiful in action" too.

So did the BMW, it did the same thing as these two but at Road America in like 2000.

 

[Northstar]

The only thing I don't really like about modern LMP cars is how flat the headlight area is on some of the cars.

 

[sk8er913]

Didn't say that, go back and read it again. Actually I'll save you the trouble, what I said is in a general sense the cars of yesteryear are not that different than the modern era. You have the same aero tricks being employed, same overall look as far as ride height and overall silhouette goes. How these are somehow more ugly...is beyond me. Clearly people don't remember 92 when the aero regs for Group C were very horrendous. But hey if you people like triple tier or quadruple tier rear wings...that's all you.




So did the BMW, it did the same thing as these two but at Road America in like 2000.

I didnt follow WEC until 2012 and AMLS 2014...

 

[ProjectWHaT]

The only thing I don't really like about modern LMP cars is how flat the headlight area is on some of the cars.

The TS040 that was posted was the high downforce setup so it has headlights that appear really flat.

 

[cnd01]

Didn't say that, go back and read it again. Actually I'll save you the trouble, what I said is in a general sense the cars of yesteryear are not that different than the modern era. You have the same aero tricks being employed, same overall look as far as ride height and overall silhouette goes. How these are somehow more ugly...is beyond me. Clearly people don't remember 92 when the aero regs for Group C were very horrendous. But hey if you people like triple tier or quadruple tier rear wings...that's all you.

In general, yea LMP and Group C are similar if you go very broad. Group C utilized different underbody aero that I don't think is allowed anymore. No hybrids unless you count that Panoz in like 1999 or something. I just don't see how today's car are anywhere close to as aesthetically good looking as those of yesteryear. Pick any car from the Group C era including those quadruple rear wings and they'll be way better looking than what we have today. The LMP today just don't do it for me. That fin makes them even uglier.

It's all personal preference, but I have always liked the prototype that can still draw some resemblance to a road car. I really wished the LMP1-Evo concept would have happened

 

[sk8er913]

In general, yea LMP and Group C are similar if you go very broad. Group C utilized different underbody aero that I don't think is allowed anymore. No hybrids unless you count that Panoz in like 1999 or something. I just don't see how today's car are anywhere close to as aesthetically good looking as those of yesteryear. Pick any car from the Group C era including those quadruple rear wings and they'll be way better looking than what we have today. The LMP today just don't do it for me. That fin makes them even uglier.

It's all personal preference, but I have always liked the prototype that can still draw some resemblance to a road car. I really wished the LMP1-Evo concept would have happened

The fins have an obvious performance purpose though. can you explain the underbody Aero of the GC cars? This is the first time I'm hearing of it.

 

[UnkaD]

Personally, my favorite cars were those of the last GT1 year in 1998 and the prototypes from 1999 up to 2005. The 1999 field was epic! It was the first race I got to watch live as well. It was really hard to stomach the new rules package that introduced the short-cut tails and increased ground clearance. It just didn't suit my tastes, and the R10 was just all kinds of hideous. But as time went on and the cars evolved, I came to appreciate them in realization of the fact that they're different from before and can no longer be compared. The narrower wings help offset the short tails in my opinion.
For last year and this year the cars have grown on me. The Audi looks pretty cool and I love the Toyota in the high-downforce configuration. The Nissan will probably never grow on me. It's the new R10.
Anyway, this is all just opinion on looks alone.

 

[sk8er913]

Personally, my favorite cars were those of the last GT1 year in 1998 and the prototypes from 1999 up to 2005. The 1999 field was epic! It was the first race I got to watch live as well. It was really hard to stomach the new rules package that introduced the short-cut tails and increased ground clearance. It just didn't suit my tastes, and the R10 was just all kinds of hideous. But as time went on and the cars evolved, I came to appreciate them in realization of the fact that they're different from before and can no longer be compared. The narrower wings help offset the short tails in my opinion.
For last year and this year the cars have grown on me. The Audi looks pretty cool and I love the Toyota in the high-downforce configuration. The Nissan will probably never grow on me. It's the new R10.
Anyway, this is all just opinion on looks alone.

first Le Mans was 2012 really cool... and I watched the Audi movie for 2011 (Truth in 24II) the week before. So much hype! But yes. 1998 had possibly the best grid of all 70 of them! the other one you can say is 1989... weird how those numbers work out. Seems like every 10-20 years everyone gets hyped and joins at the same time. I'm excited to see this years and I can't wait to see if any teams announce their 2016 LMP1 program during Le Mans week this year. GO NISSAN!


So who are we all wanting to win this year and why? I want Nissan to win. They are a lot more open source than the others are about their designs and information. Their design is completely different than everyone else in the grid. And to top it off they support this community. And R35s are awesome. Who knew a car that big could out handle an M3 and out accelerate most sports cars. O.o

 

[UnkaD]

I really want Toyota to win since they have been so close a couple times and finished with heartbreak. It has to be soon 'cause I feel that Porsche will be a monster once they really get on top of their program.

 

[Kamuifanboy]

I'd like to see Toyota win as well. Always a downer when a cheap part costed you a big lead/win at Le Mans. I would like Porsche to win as well. Same company as Audi but, I prefer the Porsche brand for some reason. Even though I'm not a fan of 911's.

I think we'll be hearing a Mazda program for 2016 or 2017. I'd personally love to see what McLaren could do with a modern LMP1 car. Probably won't ever happen again though

 

[sk8er913]

I'd like to see Toyota win as well. Always a downer when a cheap part costed you a big lead/win at Le Mans. I would like Porsche to win as well. Same company as Audi but, I prefer the Porsche brand for some reason. Even though I'm not a fan of 911's.

I think we'll be hearing a Mazda program for 2016 or 2017. I'd personally love to see what McLaren could do with a modern LMP1 car. Probably won't ever happen again though

Don't they(Mclaren) have a GTLM car? Maybe theyll win overall again who knoes... lol. And about Mazda yeah, I read something about how they were taking an interest in Nissans entry, I'm speculating they also recognize that Toyota is in it.

My #1 choice is definitely Nissan. But I would be happy if Toyota or Audi won, Porsche is neutral to me. Toyota have a really nice car and they've been so close so many times, they deserve a win. Audi has been dominate for so long, I encourage their continued victory and support. Because if they start losing it will be the end of an era, and Ill feel kind of old I always hear the broadcasters "The era that *insert name here* was winning a lot." I'm like "Wow, They've been watching this for a long time." In a few years Ill be like, "When Audi won Le Mans." XD XD lol

... Wow this is going to be my 4th Le Mans... :censored:

 

[Crash]

I find it puzzling that increasing the surface area of a fast moving object has no direct effect on its straight line path in cross winds.

The fin will impact the straight line stability in cross winds, but the effect will be negligible as the mass of the vehicle is so large, and friction is so significant, compared to the amount of force exerted on the fin by normal cross winds.

I wonder if that vertical fin could've been implemented simply via allowing much larger/longer wing end plates, much like an airliners vertical stabilizer.

The supposed purposes of the fin are to disrupt the airfoil created naturally by the car's shape as well as create a pocket of high pressure on the car bodywork that is on the forward side of the slide and creating a comparatively low pressure pocket on the car that is on the aft side of the slide when the car is traveling sideways. The high pressure will push the car down, helping keep it on the ground. The difference in pressure on the two sides of the fin will exert a net moment, with the high pressure on the forward side of the slide pushing down with greater force, helping prevent the car from rolling over.

Larger and longer endplates will not be able to utilize the high and low pressure differential (and thus the moment exerted by the difference) of the two sides as there's no bodywork for the pressure to act upon.

 

[sk8er913]

The fin will impact the straight line stability in cross winds, but the effect will be negligible as the mass of the vehicle is so large, and friction is so significant, compared to the amount of force exerted on the fin by normal cross winds.



The supposed purposes of the fin are to disrupt the airfoil created naturally by the car's shape as well as create a pocket of high pressure on the car bodywork that is on the forward side of the slide and creating a comparatively low pressure pocket on the car that is on the aft side of the slide when the car is traveling sideways. The high pressure will push the car down, helping keep it on the ground. The difference in pressure on the two sides of the fin will exert a net moment, with the high pressure on the forward side of the slide pushing down with greater force, helping prevent the car from rolling over.

Larger and longer endplates will not be able to utilize the high and low pressure differential (and thus the moment exerted by the difference) of the two sides as there's no bodywork for the pressure to act upon.

It also helps to keep the car straight. The cross winds are a relatively small amount compared to the speed of the vehicle. I would confidently say that wind speeds on the tracks surface rarely exceed 10 MPH, and the cars themselves rarely go below 70MPH. And as pressure is exponential and not linear it will tend to go straight. Helpful in all sorts of different race and crash scenarios.

 

[IforceV8]

http://sportscar365.com/industry/scoop-spec-engine-constructor-limit-proposed-in-2017-lmp2-regs/

Oreca, Onroak ,HPD, Straka/Dome, Zytek, BR plus Riley/Coyote/Dallara/Multimatic- it looks like some companies need to start making plans to build a LMP3.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

In general, yea LMP and Group C are similar if you go very broad. Group C utilized different underbody aero that I don't think is allowed anymore. No hybrids unless you count that Panoz in like 1999 or something. I just don't see how today's car are anywhere close to as aesthetically good looking as those of yesteryear. Pick any car from the Group C era including those quadruple rear wings and they'll be way better looking than what we have today. The LMP today just don't do it for me. That fin makes them even uglier.

It's all personal preference, but I have always liked the prototype that can still draw some resemblance to a road car. I really wished the LMP1-Evo concept would have happened

No hybrids? Um hybrids were at the infancy during that time frame, it wasn't as if there was a rule imposed saying no to this. If the technology was around they'd have been using them because no rules would have said otherwise. And really you don't have to go that broad, the stuff learned them has been implemented today in a more precise and efficient way, the look of the cars can easily be traced back to Group C or LMPGT/LMP. Good looking or not is a subjective matter which I've already gone over in depth last post.

I'll never see this better looking then most of what we have today, unless you like that electric trimmer look.

Sure a current esque pikes peak car is what this seems to be good as but that's just me.

I didnt follow WEC until 2012 and AMLS 2014...

ALMS is the Asian series by the way

 

[cnd01]

No hybrids? Um hybrids were at the infancy during that time frame, it wasn't as if there was a rule imposed saying no to this. If the technology was around they'd have been using them because no rules would have said otherwise. And really you don't have to go that broad, the stuff learned them has been implemented today in a more precise and efficient way, the look of the cars can easily be traced back to Group C or LMPGT/LMP. Good looking or not is a subjective matter which I've already gone over in depth last post.

I'll never see this better looking then most of what we have today, unless you like that electric trimmer look.

I really like that Sauber. I'd take that 11 times out of 10 over any LMP today. Being an engineer, I can appreciate the math and numbers behind the design, but from a visual perspective, I don't want to see something that looks like crap to me

 

[R5]

 

[IforceV8]

Seems like somebody had a lot of input into the future of P2 at the expense of everybody else who builds a P2. http://www.racer.com/wec-le-mans/it...o-teams-for-new-05-chassis#!ORECA05_Cporate_1

 

[RACECAR]

Seems like somebody had a lot of input into the future of P2 at the expense of everybody else who builds a P2. http://www.racer.com/wec-le-mans/item/113741-wec-oreca-confirms-two-teams-for-new-05-chassis#!ORECA05_Cporate_1

So basically, you're saying Oreca is the reason for the possible spec engine/chassis proposal for P2?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I really like that Sauber. I'd take that 11 times out of 10 over any LMP today. Being an engineer, I can appreciate the math and numbers behind the design, but from a visual perspective, I don't want to see something that looks like crap to me

You're an engineer? And like for example the P2 flows nicely, looks very sporty and like a land spaceship looks out of this world. It's a beauty how this and others cars especially the new 919 are ugly is still a mystery to me. To each their own, but the removal of the shark fin that you did answers my question that I posed early on why you lot truly find them ugly.

 

[Kingofweasles]

http://sportscar365.com/industry/scoop-spec-engine-constructor-limit-proposed-in-2017-lmp2-regs/

Oreca, Onroak ,HPD, Straka/Dome, Zytek, BR plus Riley/Coyote/Dallara/Multimatic- it looks like some companies need to start making plans to build a LMP3.

That's a pretty stupid rule IMHO.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Hopefully that'll get shot down. LMP2 is very strong at the moment and hopefully it'll remain that way. A lack of competition will not make it stronger.

 

[IforceV8]

So basically, you're saying Oreca is the reason for the possible spec engine/chassis proposal for P2?

The day SC365 publishes it's "scoop" of 2017 P2 regs and within 2 hrs Oreca issues a press release w/artwork stating that their new P2 will comply with the future and unpublished as of now P2 regs.

 

[cnd01]

You're an engineer? And like for example the P2 flows nicely, looks very sporty and like a land spaceship looks out of this world. It's a beauty how this and others cars especially the new 919 are ugly is still a mystery to me. To each their own, but the removal of the shark fin that you did answers my question that I posed early on why you lot truly find them ugly.

I think that Oreca 05 looks horrible. And every other LMP1-HY, L, and LMP2 besides maybe the Sky-Activ Lola which still needs the fin removed. All the LMP today look like they were designed by someone who sat a little too long at the CAD desk and another person who spent waaaaay too much time in the wind tunnel at least to me. I understand to maximize performance, they all maximize functionality and I do like that aspect, but I don't think it should be taken to the absolute extreme making them look absurd. (which to answer your question Yes I'm an engineer) I applaud Nissan for getting something out there that's a different look. It's the best looking LMP out there by lightyears. Take the fin off and it gets even better.

 

[TDZdave]

Does that shark fin really have an astronomical advantage? I genuinely believe its just more billboard space.

 

[Furinkazen]

I think that Oreca 05 looks horrible. And every other LMP1-HY, L, and LMP2 besides maybe the Sky-Activ Lola which still needs the fin removed. All the LMP today look like they were designed by someone who sat a little too long at the CAD desk and another person who spent waaaaay too much time in the wind tunnel at least to me. I understand to maximize performance, they all maximize functionality and I do like that aspect, but I don't think it should be taken to the absolute extreme making them look absurd. (which to answer your question Yes I'm an engineer) I applaud Nissan for getting something out there that's a different look. It's the best looking LMP out there by lightyears. Take the fin off and it gets even better.

I would take an LMP once a Ferrari AM driver was done with it over an early-gen DP.

Function > Form. These cars are not created to win beauty contests but to last 24 hours. Is it not ironic that at the dawn of a new golden age for Le Mans racing we are hung up on something as tiny as details.


I'd rather have ugly cars (and FYI I don't think the current cars are bad at all) which give fantastic racing than super sexy looking streamliners which can't compete.