Acura/HPD's future plans

[Félix]

Just to make things clear, Duncan Dayton is not exactly poor, right? I think I read he owns Target or something... he could certainly fund a season of racing, especially with such a good car. I know it's not my decision to make (at all!), but he's raced out of his own pockets in historics and probably in his first ALMS season with the MG-Lola. Could he really pull out of Le Mans?? They would do very well even with him at the wheel.

[AGD]

Originally Posted by Félix

Just to make things clear, Duncan Dayton is not exactly poor, right? I think I read he owns Target or something... he could certainly fund a season of racing, especially with such a good car. I know it's not my decision to make (at all!), but he's raced out of his own pockets in historics and probably in his first ALMS season with the MG-Lola. Could he really pull out of Le Mans?? They would do very well even with him at the wheel.

I'm not sure how Duncan makes his money, but I think he wants to be like the beacons of American racing team owners such as Roger Penske and Chip Ganassi. Penske and Ganassi have a policy of only spending other people's money to go racing.

For all we know, Highcroft could have gone over budget last year. I know they had sponsorship from Patron last year still, but who knows how much they paid. That deal was signed when they were still getting support from Acura. Perhaps Duncan had to spend his own money last year and now he does not want to do it again with little prospects for sponsorship looming. Of course, he is also trying to establish an IRL team so his money and resources are a bit split right now.

One would think that Honda would see the goldmine they are sitting on and jump on the opportunity to potentially beat (or at least hang with) Audi and Peugeot while spending a fraction of the amount they are, but who knows what their ideology is right now. For one thing, Honda of America, who obviously had some interest in sports car racing a few years ago, may not be so willing to fund a program that will be racing in France. The HPD division seems to be doing well enough selling engines with little factory support. Why spend money when you are making it already? That could be their thinking, although I'd like to think it could benefit their brand to win races like Le Mans and Sebring. Then again, I don't think many CR-V/Odyssey/Pilot driving soccer moms care about the ALMS. The ARX-01 is far too good looking to carry the Acura badge any more. Acura seems to have a policy of putting their name on hideous looking cars. The Abruzzi probably makes Acura designers smile.

Perhaps the European Honda divisions need to be the ones who step up, but I don't know if that would benefit Highcroft. Having said that, it would be quite interesting to see how Highcroft does in the LMS if they go that route this year.

[TWK]

Duncan Dayton is one of many cousins who are heirs of the Dayton family that founded Dayton department stores, became Dayton Hudson Corporation, founded Target, then renamed itself after its discount subsidiary.

Duncan's generation has not been active in managing the corporation, and in fact the family is largely divested of its holdings in Target.

Duncan Dayton is CEO of Tamarac Investments, Inc., a real estate investment/holding company headquartered in Wayzata Minnesota, where he grew up, and where the family is still prominent. His cousin, Mark, formerly a US Senator, is now governor of Minnesota.

Don't expect him to spend willy-nilly to chase a racing adventure. He's done it the smart way so far, some his own, and quite a bit through sponsorships. He has no plan to go broke. He does not seem to have the kind of ego that requires it.

It's silly to say "I think he'll..." In fact no one here knows what he will do, but history suggests some things - including a pretty coompetitive driving career, he was particularly good on ovals, and he has said he enjoys driving historic cars more than current race cars - that don't add up to any certainty that he will make big personal expenditures to stay in sports car racing.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Chiana

ACO didn't like what HPD did last year?

Originally Posted by dj choc ice

Also surprised at the HPD's lack of straight line grunt, won't surprise me to see RML and Strakka lobbying for a bigger air restrictor if they still lack straight line go come spa or race day at Ricard.

I had a look at the restrictor/boost table in the LMP2 rules and compared it with the GTE rules. It is obvious that something is wrong.

In LMP2 not cost capped the air restrictor size and maximum boost pressure are:

• 3600 cc NA: 2 x 28.9 mm (e.g., Judd/BMW V8)
• 4500 cc NA: 2 x 27.6 mm (e.g., Nissan V8)
• 2800 cc turbo: 2 x 27.6 mm, 1950 mbar boost (e.g., HPD V6)

In GTE the same engine configurations would get the following restrictor and boost:

• 3600 cc NA: 2 x 28.9 mm
• 4500 cc NA: 2 x 28.3 mm
• 2800 cc turbo: 2 x 27.7 mm, 2400 mbar boost

In LMP2 and GTE all engines are supposed to produce similar power levels. However, under the GTE rules the HPD engine would be allowed to run 450 mbar extra boost!

[gustavobamba]

Well, is this a way that ACO found to send a message to HPD to go to LMP1 because they will never more have the dominance in LMP2 like the past year????

If is that so, the message could be misunderstanding, leading to Honda Europe to abandon the LMP 2 project and the future LMP1 Coupe.

[gwyllion]

RML and Strakka are running with big dive planes, which also does not help for top speed: http://endurance-info.com/version2/g...TTT_JS_009.jpg

[gwyllion]

Graham Goodwin just confirmed that there has been a meeting between RML/Strakka and the organizers about their power disadvantage.

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

RML and Strakka are running with big dive planes, which also does not help for top speed: http://endurance-info.com/version2/g...TTT_JS_009.jpg

I'm really confused by their setup. I am told that Ricard requires just a little bit more downforce than Le Mans and that drag (reduction of) is a priority. What rear gurney is RML/Strakka running?

Having said that, there's more and more evidence that the HPD LMP2 motor is down on power. At Sebring Level 5 was 12 mph slower than the Oreca Nissan and 10 mph slower than the LMPCs. I don't believe Level 5 could be bothered to "drag up" their setup to make a point to the ACO.

[gwyllion]

During the LMS test at Paul Ricard RML was running with a very big gurney, as you can see from this picture gallery: http://www.rml-adgroup.com/racing/LM...llery_2011.htm

[gwyllion]

I found a picture of the first practice session which confirms that the HPD cars are still running the big gurney flap: http://pitlane-vision.com/images/sto.../01.04/1/9.jpg

[MulsanneMike]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

During the LMS test at Paul Ricard RML was running with a very big gurney, as you can see from this picture gallery: http://www.rml-adgroup.com/racing/LM...llery_2011.htm

Exactly, though I'm still confused by their setup. Why would you go with what appears on the face of it for a medium to high DF setup at a track that requires low? Look at photos of the Strakka car from last year: low DF louvers and no trailing edge body gurney. And now they have even less HP this year with the new P2 Honda engine.

[broadrun96]

Has anything changed on the chassis that would require more downforce for the same handling? And is there a way to compare the current settings of the Lola of Level 5 and the RML car and how much downforce they would be developing, ballpark estimate of course not a detailed analysis?

[JAG]

Three seconds off the pace with a great chassis seems like a huge amount.

P1's are doing 1.48, P2 ORECA 1.50, Strakka 1.53, FLM 1.56.

[gwyllion]

I just read Paul Ricard preview on the RML website. It nicely explains which LMP2 cars are cost-capped and which are not.

This is an important factor in the whole performance discussion because cost-capped cars run with 20 kg less (900 kg vs 920 kg for not cost-capped) and slighty bigger restrictors (around 5%).

The Pecon Lola complies with the cost cap and hence features the dorsal fin. The Norma probably also falls under the cost cap, but it does not need the fin because the chassis was produced last year.

The Oreca 03 is very strange story. It falls under the cost cap rules, but Oreca has found some clever explanation not to run the fin:

The explanation from Oreca has been that the chassis was designed before the 2011 regulations were confirmed, but that it is still economically capable of building the car within the constraints of the "cost capped" requirements. However, they claim, the aerodynamics of the chassis might be adversely effected by the addition of a fin, and the added expense of testing whether this was the case would contribute substantially to the final cost of the car. As a result, the price tag would rise, and thus fail to meet the ACO's stipulated cost-cap ceiling.

The French manufacturer appears to have won its case, and with it the 20 kilo dispensation and a set of juicy restrictors.

Bottomline of all this. The performance of the HPDs should be mainly compared the Greaves Zytek-Nissan, which is also not cost-capped. The Orecas and Pecon Lola are supposed to have a small engine advantage.

[Fogelhund]

daft

[AGD]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Bottomline of all this. The performance of the HPDs should be mainly compared the Greaves Zytek-Nissan, which is also not cost-capped. The Orecas and Pecon Lola are supposed to have a small engine advantage.

Interesting stuff, but the fastest HPD is still almost four seconds off the Greaves Zytek.

[gwyllion]

The main thing that I do not understand, is why HPD went the turbo route?

The restrictor/boost table has not changed since the draft 4 version of the rules, which dates from June 2010 (available on Mike's website). The only change in the final rules is that the cost capped LMP2s got a slighty bigger restrictor.

Didn't HPD know beforehand that the turbo engines had a disadvantage? I would expect that it is fairly easy to determine with simulations which engine configuration is the best choice...

[AGD]

Honda committed very early to the V6 turbo I do believe. Perhaps they were led to believe the rules would be different? Anyway, Honda does not have much history with V8 engines at least in terms of street cars. Perhaps that has something to do with it. Then again, they've never been big on turbos either in street cars although they do have at least one turbo car (Acura RDX).

I have to assume that the regulations will change eventually. Is there any justification for the rules as they are other than to keep HPD from running away from the show? Roush has almost no shot of selling their turbo Ford engine with the rules the way they are. They are having a difficult enough time as it is.

The rumor was that HPD would send Highcroft to Europe to show off their latest wares. I guess that might work if they run the LMP1 equipment, but I don't think HPD can be too happy about the situation especially with Honda putting their badge on at least the RML car and maybe the Strakka one too.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by AGD

Then again, they've never been big on turbos either in street cars although they do have at least one turbo car (Acura RDX).

They could have gone for a 3.6 or 3.8 V6. Judd picked 3.6 liter as displacement and they seem to be doing a good job...

[AGD]

It could have something to do with their 2.4L V6 Turbo IRL engine for 2012. I'm not sure if it is related in any way with the LMP2 engine.

[gwyllion]

The LMP2 engine is totally unrelated to the new IRL engine for 2012. See http://auto-racing.speedtv.com/artic...rkman-2012-qa/

While HPD appears committed to keeping costs down with their engine offerings, the fact that they will be producing two new, yet completely different twin-turbo V6 motors seems to contradict their stated goals.

Using a de-stroked version of their Accord-based V6 for the 2012 IndyCar engine would appear to be the most efficient use of funding and resources, but Berkman says that after careful evaluation, building a production-based LMP2 engine and a purpose-built IndyCar engine will be necessary.

[AGD]

I know Honda was a major participant in choosing the new IRL formula, maybe they just like small turbo sixes. I can't really see that being the case as they don't have any street cars like that as far as I know, but perhaps that's something coming in the future kind of like Ford's EcoBoost turbo range. Perhaps the idea of a 3.6ish liter V6 going up against similar sized (and bigger) V8s did not interest them.

In retrospect it would have been most preferable to pick whatever formula the French favorites run, but I guess HPD is kind of new to the ACO game!

[JAG]

All it takes is a restrictor change overnight and they are back in the game.

[gwyllion]

According to John Dagys' notebook performance adjustments will only be made after the race:

ACO Sporting Director Vincent Beaumesnil would not comment directly on the situation but confirmed that balance of performance adjustments would be evaluated after this weekend, the second race of the season, as defined in the regulations.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by littleman

My information suggests the Nissan engine is producing circa 510bhp whilst the HPD is "pumping" out circa 420bhp................Why have HPD got it so wrong!

The restrictor sizes of cost capped LMP2s are slightly bigger than for GTE. Offcially the Porsche 911 produces 455 bhp (see here), the Ferrari 458 465 bhp (see here) and the BMW M3 485 bhp (see here). So a number around 500 bhp seems very realistic for the Nissan engine.

The Oreca 03 falls under the cost cap. If it did not, it would have to run with a 5% smaller restrictor: 510 bhp - 5% = 485 bhp. That means that the HPD engine has disadvantage of 65 bhp on top of the 20 kg extra ballast. That is huge