Porsche in LMP1!?

[dxk1]

Originally Posted by JAG

It's relative, F1 has worked for Ferrari, Mclaren-Mercedes, Renault and BMW.

It's been disastrous for Jaguar, Porsche, Peugeot, Honda (since they re-entered) and Toyota.

Didn't Honda at least have few years of success with their engine in the McLaren Chasis? Or was it Williams?

DK

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Dario911

You must consider LMP1 could make more than 5000 km with the same engine, at the maximum of its potential. F1 could do the same just for 2 hours (in the best case).

F1 cars do a bit more than 2 hours of running in 2 race weekends

Originally Posted by Dario911

I suggest it should be harder to build a car to compete in a modern long distance race.

Peugeot can beat Audi in just 2 seasons. You can not deny that this would be totally impossible in Formula 1.

[wapomumalo]

Originally Posted by Valker

Sorry, that's not the case.

Volkswagen group owns 99.7% of Audi and Porsche owns about 35% of
Volkswagen group (has plans to increase ownership up to 51%).

EXACTLY...

[Dead-Eye]

Originally Posted by dxk1

Didn't Honda at least have few years of success with their engine in the McLaren Chasis? Or was it Williams?

DK

Hence "since they re-entered"

The eighties don't really count anymore.

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by deggis

The years of '98-99 when Toyota tried but failed were golden years, there were a lot more manufacturers: BMW, Mercedes, Audi, underdogs Nissan and Panoz = higher competition

Much harder to beat several teams (like in F1) than only beating one rival team (like now in Le Mans) and try to win all 19 rounds in the season than to win one race, despite the length of 24 hours (of course to keep competitive LMP team has to race in ALMS/LMS too), where bad luck can be a huge factor.


Do you also say F1 can not be regarded as pinnacle of motorsport because it uses grooved tyres?


You first said it's prehistoric...


Diagram is from 2006. Engine freeze came in 2007. But when the new engine concept comes, they can again unleash their engine research and development resources, and then spend less on windtunnels.


Where and when?


Real and non-real motorsport? You have naive and pointless antipathy towards F1.

1. Why don't you ask to Peugeot if is so easy to beat only a competitor, if this competitor is as strong as Audi and Joest.

2. Formula 1 is not the pinnacle of motorsport for several reasons. The rules are mortifying research. I ask you again, how many innovations have been arrived from F1 in the last 10 years? What is the real link between F1 and production cars? You can find TDI, HDI, FSI, DFI and all the other endurance innovations in the Audi, Porsche, Peugeot cars. You can find in your car the real race technology, adapted to the everyday driving.

3. Formula 1 KERS is not as sophisticated as you would expect from the "pinnacle" of motorsport. No real innovations. Luca Marmorini said Toyota Prius system is more efficient, modern and does work better.

4. Just after the end of 2008 Le Mans, F1 world (drivers, for example) have criticized Le Mans, trying to describe the race as dangerous and boring. So, FIA has imposed to ACO to reduce to LMP1 and P2 speed, because they are "unsafe". Oh, what a wonder sense of timing! They have decided to stop P1 just when they've started to show a part of their real potential. This remembers me the Group C story... Since the actual rules on the aerodynamic have come, how many P1 or P2 have had serious and fatal accident? The speed escalation of P1 has been comparable to the F1s one.

5. I watch every F1 race in tv. Mine is not a naive point of view on this sport, but is based on some facts. In the actual f1 you can see a show only when it rains. No surpasses, and when there's a real fight (Spa), FIA is ready to modify the race results with stupid sentences. In the Endurance is not the same. Do you remember what is happened in 1000 km of Monza between Audi and Peugeot? Yes, there has been a real fair play. No, F1 doesn't know the sense of this word!
In F1 there's too much politic and less show and sport. Real races are made of surpasses, real fighting, real emotions. Don't tell me you can see all thisi things in modern F1!

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

F1 cars do a bit more than 2 hours of running in 2 race weekends

Dear, 5000 km are more than all the kms done by a F1 in all the season... And have been crossed in 24 hours. The average speed is clear in excess of 200 km/h (under the rain).

Peugeot can beat Audi in just 2 seasons. You can not deny that this would be totally impossible in Formula 1.

Excuse me, but I don't remember Peugeot has won against Audi... Oh, has won four races in LMS, but the title has gone to Ingolstadt.
Oh... are you talking about Le Mans? No, I'm sorry. Audi has won again... Please, help me... where did Peugeot win against Audi?
Why don't you ask to Peugeot men if they've won or not against Audi?
I could give you an answer... if would not wait to talk with mr. Famin.

Audi's budget for Le Mans in 2006, I heard was around 120 millions €. I would say... moneys well spent.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

Marmorini's main criticism was that F1 only allows rear wheel KERS, hence limiting the efficiency.

The LMP1 hybrids annouced for 2009 also satisfy his definition of "primitive":

• F1: max 60 kW, storage free, rear wheel KERS
• Zytek: 35 kW rear, Li-ion battery, rear wheel KERS
• Peugeot 908HY: 60 kW rear, Li-ion battery, rear wheel KERS
• Toyota Supra HV-R: 150 kW rear (gearbox) + 2 x 10 kW front (in wheels), supercaps (+ Li-ion battery?), 4 wheel KERS

I checked the LMP1 rules and four wheel drive is not permitted (article 9.4). This effectively rules out the hybrid system applied in the Super GT Toyota.

[Dead-Eye]

Would be interesting to see how the Super GT rules are worded regarding 4WD and hybrids. As far as I know normal four wheel drive isn't allowed there either.

[zac510]

I still don't see why the amount of kW dictates that one is instantly superior. Everybody that knows something knows there's more to an engine than it's power output.

The f1 and sportscars will demand smaller and lighter systems than the Super GT Toyota, due to aerodynamics, weight balance and space restrictions. This is precisely what will make them superior after a few years of development.

gwyllion, I think one of your specs there are wrong - F1 is allowing batt/cap storage aswell as flywheel, but the lap output is restricted so it's a short term storage. Kinda grey area I guess!

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Dario911

2. Formula 1 is not the pinnacle of motorsport for several reasons. The rules are mortifying research. I ask you again, how many innovations have been arrived from F1 in the last 10 years? What is the real link between F1 and production cars? You can find TDI, HDI, FSI, DFI and all the other endurance innovations in the Audi, Porsche, Peugeot cars. You can find in your car the real race technology, adapted to the everyday driving.

TDI, HDI, FSI and DFI are not endurance innovations. They existed in road cars well before they raced in Le Mans. Mitsubishi GDI appeared on the market in 1997, VW introduced the Lupo 1.4 FSI in 2000 and Porsche introduced DFI in the Cayenne at the end of 2006. And as a FIAT fan you know that modern common rail diesels appeared on the market in 1997.

Originally Posted by Dario911

3. Formula 1 KERS is not as sophisticated as you would expect from the "pinnacle" of motorsport. No real innovations. Luca Marmorini said Toyota Prius system is more efficient, modern and does work better.

Of course flywheel hybrids, lithium-ion batteries, supercaps, etc. are no innovation at all and less modern in comparison with the Ni-MH batteries of the Toyota Prius

Originally Posted by Dario911

In the actual f1 you can see a show only when it rains. No surpasses, and when there's a real fight (Spa), FIA is ready to modify the race results with stupid sentences. In the Endurance is not the same. Do you remember what is happened in 1000 km of Monza between Audi and Peugeot? Yes, there has been a real fair play. No, F1 doesn't know the sense of this word!
In F1 there's too much politic and less show and sport.

So according to you there is no politics involved in the selection of Le Mans entries by ACO? Nor when Bourdais stopped his Peugeot for a few minutes during his last lap in 2007?

Originally Posted by Dario911

Excuse me, but I don't remember Peugeot has won against Audi... Oh, has won four races in LMS, but the title has gone to Ingolstadt.

So you do acknowlegde that Peugeot can win races against Audi only in its second season.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by zac510

gwyllion, I think one of your specs there are wrong - F1 is allowing batt/cap storage aswell as flywheel, but the lap output is restricted so it's a short term storage. Kinda grey area I guess!

I meant storage type is free. Capacity is indeed limited in 2009. I imagine that this will be increased gradually in the future.

I totally agree that hybrids in F1 will be superior in packaging and weight in the next years. Expect state of the art battery and capacitor systems. In fact all this will not be very green.

[zac510]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I meant storage type is free.

Oh, silly me

[Dario911]

I've forget you are the master, and Marmorini is just an... amateur! Why don't you read his interview on http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/65226.

FSI, TDI and all other engine innovations did exist before to be applied in motorsport, but motorsport has been the real test to improve this technologies! The TDI applied on the Audi R10 has been the benchmark for the next TDI generation engine. At the same way of the new TFSI. Are these innovations or not? And then, would you compare the GDI system with Audi's FSI direct fuel injection?!

Politic does exist in ACO, too, of course. But ACO doesn't change the result of the races following its convenience or trying to make happy its favorite team. A great difference, in my opinion, from the FIA.

I don't see what is the problem for Bourdais stop few minutes before the end of 24 hours... give me light, please!

Yes, Peugeot can win races. But don't forget Peugeot has got a long racing experience, a lot of resources, very capable drivers and a greatful car. It's not just like one of all the little teams playing the role of appearance in formula 1. That's another meaning difference.

[gwyllion]

Originally Posted by Dario911

I've forget you are the master, and Marmorini is just an... amateur! Why don't you read his interview on http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/65226.

I did, but perhaps you should as well. Earlier you claimed "Luca Marmorini said Toyota Prius system is more efficient, modern and does work better."

Where does he state that the Prius hybrid system is more modern? Perhaps the next time you meet him, you should ask him whether Ni-MH batteries are considered modern these days.

I also don't see any numbers about the efficiency of the Prius regenerative braking. It works in the front wheels so presumably it will indeed be more efficient that a KERS on the rear wheels. However this is not mentioned in the above article, as Marmorini compares the F1 KERS to the 4 wheel KERS of the Toyota Supra HV-R.

Originally Posted by Dario911

I don't see what is the problem for Bourdais stop few minutes before the end of 24 hours... give me light, please!

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=97600

Originally Posted by Dario911

But don't forget Peugeot has got a long racing experience, a lot of resources, very capable drivers and a greatful car. It's not just like one of all the little teams playing the role of appearance in formula 1.

Oh, you mean like Toyota and Honda in F1.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Dario911

1. Why don't you ask to Peugeot if is so easy to beat only a competitor, if this competitor is as strong as Audi and Joest.

It's not easy, I believe I didn't say so, but it is easier challenge. Lets put it this way then: beating one opponent is hard. Beating several opponents is harder. Once more manufacturers joins (Toyota, Jaguar... ) join, then I can re-evaluate this.

2. Formula 1 is not the pinnacle of motorsport for several reasons. The rules are mortifying research. I ask you again, how many innovations have been arrived from F1 in the last 10 years?

Altough I never made claims about F1-derived innovations, but since that is second time you ask this, here is your answer then: "not many" or "I don't know because they're not in the public knowledge". No one knows what they have got from engine development, electronics, transmissions, whatever, very little things can be beneficial but not ground breaking innovations - and same applies to LMPs too.

Why Le Mans is then the pinnacle of motorsport and for what reasons?

What is the real link between F1 and production cars?

The fact that Ferrari, Honda, Toyota, Renault, BMW and Mercedes makes road cars.

You can find TDI, HDI, FSI, DFI and all the other endurance innovations in the Audi, Porsche, Peugeot cars. You can find in your car the real race technology, adapted to the everyday driving.

Audi R10 was not the first ever diesel car. No one outside Audi knows how much it has contributed to VAG's TDI engines, but I believe the bigger impact has been on diesel's image becoming sporty. Before Audi R10 was revealed, "diesel race car" was a joke.

3. Formula 1 KERS is not as sophisticated as you would expect from the "pinnacle" of motorsport. No real innovations. Luca Marmorini said Toyota Prius system is more efficient, modern and does work better.

How is that then ANY different to KERS in LMP?! It might turn out that ACO makes even more restrictive KERS rules to keep balance between hybrids and non-hybrids or not to rule out privateers.

4. Just after the end of 2008 Le Mans, F1 world (drivers, for example) have criticized Le Mans, trying to describe the race as dangerous and boring.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/...1.1-282919.php

This?

Comments simply show they might be scared. Sportscars will never be a threat to F1's worldwide interest and attention, days of '60s and '70s won't come back, but it is a threat if it lures manufacturers.

So, FIA has imposed to ACO to reduce to LMP1 and P2 speed, because they are "unsafe". Oh, what a wonder sense of timing! They have decided to stop P1 just when they've started to show a part of their real potential. This remembers me the Group C story... Since the actual rules on the aerodynamic have come, how many P1 or P2 have had serious and fatal accident? The speed escalation of P1 has been comparable to the F1s one.

You better give some sources for your claimed FIA-influence on the new 2010 regs... or I'm ready to say that is absolute bullsh*t.

ACO has to comply with FIA general safety regulations, but which has nothing to do with performance related technical regulations.

All this safety and speed reducement stuff has came from ACO itself. Partly for a good reason too after so many airbone accidents, partly not purely from a spectators' point of view.

5. I watch every F1 race in tv. Mine is not a naive point of view on this sport, but is based on some facts. In the actual f1 you can see a show only when it rains. No surpasses, and when there's a real fight (Spa), FIA is ready to modify the race results with stupid sentences. In the Endurance is not the same. Do you remember what is happened in 1000 km of Monza between Audi and Peugeot? Yes, there has been a real fair play. No, F1 doesn't know the sense of this word!

Going little bit out of context.

In F1 there's too much politic and less show and sport.

With this I can agree. But there have always been politics, which is just natural extension, it being the highest level of motorsport (waiting for your objection to this ).

Real races are made of surpasses, real fighting, real emotions. Don't tell me you can see all thisi things in modern F1!

Don't tell me you can't see.

I still don't understand why you think I dismiss sportscars. Like I said, I'm fan of both, F1 and sportscars. And I have quite a few times defended sportscars or raised discusissions them on F1 related message forums.

Best, most thrilling race I've seen in last couple of years has been... ALMS's finale at Laguna Seca last year. Not an F1 race!

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Dario911

Audi's budget for Le Mans in 2006, I heard was around 120 millions €. I would say... moneys well spent.

Where did you hear that? I'm just extremely interested about knowing more about top teams' budgets in sportscars.


...

[deggis]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I meant storage type is free. Capacity is indeed limited in 2009. I imagine that this will be increased gradually in the future.

Yes, I can't find link right now but there were even exact numbers in some plans. I think it was something like doubling or tripling it by 2011.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Dario911

Politic does exist in ACO, too, of course. But ACO doesn't change the result of the races following its convenience or trying to make happy its favorite team. A great difference, in my opinion, from the FIA.

And in Le Mans/LMS/ALMS there have been similar to Spa controversies such as...?

Luckily there have been no need for politics that often.

Yes, Peugeot can win races. But don't forget Peugeot has got a long racing experience, a lot of resources, very capable drivers and a greatful car. It's not just like one of all the little teams playing the role of appearance in formula 1. That's another meaning difference.

(altough gwyllion already answered this) Toyota and Honda has also long experience and a lot of resources if not even more... so why the goal (= win world championship) has not been accomplished yet? According to you, it should be child's play!

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I did, but perhaps you should as well. Earlier you claimed "Luca Marmorini said Toyota Prius system is more efficient, modern and does work better."
Where does he state that the Prius hybrid system is more modern? Perhaps the next time you meet him, you should ask him whether Ni-MH batteries are considered modern these days.

Marmorini said: "(They are) extremely simplified compared to the system we have on the Toyota Prius road car, or even on the Toyota Supra HV-R that won the 24 Hours of Tokachi" (referred to F1 KERS).This mean that Prius system can be considered more advanced in confront of the F1 system. He doesn't speak clearly about efficiency, but it's clear a more technological system could be more efficient, of course with least improvements.

Originally Posted by gwyllion

I also don't see any numbers about the efficiency of the Prius regenerative braking. It works in the front wheels so presumably it will indeed be more efficient that a KERS on the rear wheels. However this is not mentioned in the above article, as Marmorini compares the F1 KERS to the 4 wheel KERS of the Toyota Supra HV-R.
http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?t=97600
Oh, you mean like Toyota and Honda in F1.

Kinetic energy of a road car is obviously less than the energy of a race car, but the KERS system of a road car (like Prius) is more modern conception. F1 system is semplified, if compared to this.

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by deggis

It's not easy, I believe I didn't say so, but it is easier challenge. Lets put it this way then: beating one opponent is hard. Beating several opponents is harder. Once more manufacturers joins (Toyota, Jaguar... ) join, then I can re-evaluate this.

I repeat you the answer: ask to Peugeot how much easy this could be. They've raced with a clearly faster car (upt to 5" per lap), but they've been humiliated by Audi in Le Mans and Le Mans Series. Ok, they've won4 of the 5 races, but they've lost the final title like amateurs.

Originally Posted by deggis

Altough I never made claims about F1-derived innovations, but since that is second time you ask this, here is your answer then: "not many" or "I don't know because they're not in the public knowledge". No one knows what they have got from engine development, electronics, transmissions, whatever, very little things can be beneficial but not ground breaking innovations - and same applies to LMPs too.

Please, don't tell me the F1 innovations on road cars are top-secret! You can drive your car, with FSI, TDI, HDI, and think: "Oh, a car with this same technology has won Le Mans (or LMS, ALMS, etc...)". For example, when you read about F1 Sequetial Gearbox, you can think it has been derived from the F1. But that's not the true, because the road cars (and sportcar) gearbox has got a completely different system. The racing gearbox is based on the frontal graft system, while the street car garbox is based on conventional graft system. Frontal graft is not possible to use on street cars, for its noise and brutal way to work. But it's faster tha any other street car sequential gearbox. Ferrari uses a electronic management system for its gearbox, derived from F1, but the structure of the gearbox is quite different.
A great difference: to have this kind of technology, you must spend at least 100k € (or more), while for TDI, HDI, FSI, DFI, etc., you can buy a cheaper car. Because this technologies can be transferred on a larger number of street cars, being designed to be nearest to the road going cars.

Originally Posted by deggis

Why Le Mans is then the pinnacle of motorsport and for what reasons?

Simply because it has a larger variety of engine and technical solutions. With a larger fall-out on the road going cars. Then, you must value in Le Mans hare being used more innovative technologies.

Originally Posted by deggis

The fact that Ferrari, Honda, Toyota, Renault, BMW and Mercedes makes road cars.

Is this the only link between F1 and real cars world? Sorry, I think we were speaking about technologies.

Originally Posted by deggis

Audi R10 was not the first ever diesel car. No one outside Audi knows how much it has contributed to VAG's TDI engines, but I believe the bigger impact has been on diesel's image becoming sporty. Before Audi R10 was revealed, "diesel race car" was a joke.

Audi has been the first manifacturer to buil a diesel racing engine. All the previous diesel engines used in competition were all derived from road cars versions. That's a big plus for Audi work. They are pioneer in a completely new technology.

Originally Posted by deggis

You better give some sources for your claimed FIA-influence on the new 2010 regs... or I'm ready to say that is absolute bullsh*t.

http://www.racingworld.it/fiagt/noti...a-fia-e-la-f1-

Read this article (in italian), and then tell me if what I've written are b*******t...
Autosprint 20/2008 has published an article about the FIA alarm for LMP1 performances. FIA has sent to ACO a circular, asking to take rimedies against LMP1 crashes of the last months. Monza 1000 km has been raced under "secutity alarm”. The FIA published a circular with this decision, appeared on the magazine Autosprint. I’m searching for the article, so I will send it to you.

Originally Posted by deggis

ACO has to comply with FIA general safety regulations, but which has nothing to do with performance related technical regulations. All this safety and speed reducement stuff has came from ACO itself. Partly for a good reason too after so many airbone accidents, partly not purely from a spectators' point of view.

FIA can impose to ACO to reduce P1 speed for safety reasons (do you remember Group C?), so ACO would be forced to reduce performances throught new technical rules.
Spectator point of view? What does this mean?!

Originally Posted by deggis

Going little bit out of context.

I don’t think so. You said my motivations are naïve, so I give you the reasons they aren’t.

Originally Posted by deggis

With this I can agree. But there have always been politics, which is just natural extension, it being the highest level of motorsport (waiting for your objection to this ).

Yes, it’s the highest ECONOMICAL level of motorsport. Not certainly for other reasons (technical).

Originally Posted by deggis

I still don't understand why you think I dismiss sportscars. Like I said, I'm fan of both, F1 and sportscars. And I have quite a few times defended sportscars or raised discusissions them on F1 related message forums.

I don't think you don't like Sportscars! But we are having a discussion about technology in motorsport, today. Sportscars and F1 have always been rivals. But I think actual Sportscars are more technological than actual F1.

Originally Posted by deggis

Best, most thrilling race I've seen in last couple of years has been... ALMS's finale at Laguna Seca last year. Not an F1 race!

I agree.

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by deggis

And in Le Mans/LMS/ALMS there have been similar to Spa controversies such as...?

Luckily there have been no need for politics that often.


(altough gwyllion already answered this) Toyota and Honda has also long experience and a lot of resources if not even more... so why the goal (= win world championship) has not been accomplished yet? According to you, it should be child's play!

If you follow F1, the answer is clear: they're not as organized as Ferrari and McLaren. They are based in Japan, but their motorsport are based in Europe, so the things are not the same. There are more logistic troubles, that makes harder for Japanese engineers to follow the development of the car. Imagine Ferrari or McLaren in the same conditions. Things would be the same.
You must add to this the instability of the technical department in Toyota and Honda.

[Dario911]

Toyota is going to show its new Le Mans project: new Toyota LMP1, based on the actual Dome S102. It will probably be showed November 23 on the Fuji track!

http://www.racingworld.it/fiagt/noti...-alla-sua-lmp-

[Dario911]

Originally Posted by deggis

Where did you hear that? I'm just extremely interested about knowing more about top teams' budgets in sportscars.


...

This new has been reported in several occasions by Autosprint, and it's referred only to Le Mans budget of the Audi R10 TDI.
Audi Motorsport is composed by 160 men (technicians and engineers). Not so much, but what results they achieve! Audi racing team is as prestigious as Ferrari and McLaren teams, in motorsport panorama. They've won everything, everywhere. It's a marvelously organized racing department!

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Dario911

I repeat you the answer: ask to Peugeot how much easy this could be. They've raced with a clearly faster car (upt to 5" per lap), but they've been humiliated by Audi in Le Mans and Le Mans Series. Ok, they've won4 of the 5 races, but they've lost the final title like amateurs.

You don't want to see the "bigger picture" here. Not winning the title especially in a series that consists only of 5 races with stupid points system (I prefer ALMS system, altough it would have been a draw then) is secondary. In just two seasons, Peugeot has built a car that can match and is faster than the competition and a car that can win races.

In F1, new team/manufacturer building a car that could win races in just two years would be absolutely impossible. Just to get up to speed would take years. Do you still disagree with this?

It's not about the technology alone, but level of competition. In F1, right now, it's simply higher.

For example, in Group C days it was quite similar, if not even tougher competition in sportscars, since sportscars had more manufacturers.

Please, don't tell me the F1 innovations on road cars are top-secret!

[another paragraph, moved here because it's about same thing]
Is this the only link between F1 and real cars world? Sorry, I think we were speaking about technologies.

Not top secret. But manufacturers like to keep smaller but beneficial and not necessarily ground breaking innovations to themself.

Extremely simplified example: F1 factory engineers are developing the engine (since this is example, lets forget the engine freeze). They find out something, could be some very small part, that improves performance and which possibly could be lead to road cars in future. Same applies to LMPs too.

You can drive your car, with FSI, TDI, HDI, and think: "Oh, a car with this same technology has won Le Mans (or LMS, ALMS, etc...)". For example, when you read about F1 Sequetial Gearbox, you can think it has been derived from the F1. But that's not the true, because the road cars (and sportcar) gearbox has got a completely different system.

The R10 TDI engine surely is not the same engine people have in their Audi road cars.

You know the quote "win on Sunday, sell on Monday"? It doesn't happen exactly like that, but I agree it suits sportscars (or even touring cars) better than F1 - right now.

Simply because it has a larger variety of engine and technical solutions. With a larger fall-out on the road going cars. Then, you must value in Le Mans hare being used more innovative technologies.

I believe I never said Le Mans isn't innovative.

Audi has been the first manifacturer to buil a diesel racing engine. All the previous diesel engines used in competition were all derived from road cars versions. That's a big plus for Audi work. They are pioneer in a completely new technology.

Diesel is not completely new technology. Just less researched technology.

http://www.racingworld.it/fiagt/noti...a-fia-e-la-f1-

Read this article (in italian), and then tell me if what I've written are b*******t...

Sorry if I was too harsh.

I can't understand Italian so I used Google translation, result is bad but understandable English, feel free to correct:

http://translate.google.com/translat...-8&sl=it&tl=en

Only paragraph that mentions FIA:

"But what is rather surprising result was the attention given by the FIA and some media to "case-offs", a campaign that, in some ways seemed almost of the smear against and its policies on security, everything Overall, in recent times were not so bad, especially considering that there are still leagues, where suspensions are "split" for a ride on a weld, or where there is flanked on three wheel against wheel and take-offs are on the agenda Much more than in the ALMS and LMS.
A clear sign of "nervousness" by the "circus" of the utmost formula that has not spared criticism of the 24h of Le Mans on an article dell'Herald Tribune.
That the ACO has created a "toy" definitely attractive for manufacturers and much more cheaply in Formula 1?"

How that proves FIA forced ACO to slow the cars down? That is more like a column with opinions, not news article.

Autosprint 20/2008 has published an article about the FIA alarm for LMP1 performances. FIA has sent to ACO a circular, asking to take rimedies against LMP1 crashes of the last months. Monza 1000 km has been raced under "secutity alarm”. The FIA published a circular with this decision, appeared on the magazine Autosprint. I’m searching for the article, so I will send it to you.

If you find it, that would be great.

Still, FIA regulates pretty much all the international race tracks in the world, so of course repeating scary crashes that happen on them gets their attention. And it's no different to any other series.

Until you provide that Autosprint article with hopefully more information and specifics, I don't belive this.

FIA can impose to ACO to reduce P1 speed for safety reasons (do you remember Group C?), so ACO would be forced to reduce performances throught new technical rules.

Group C was VERY different. World Sportscar Championship (or World Sports-Prototype or Endurance Championship, same thing), remember? FIA was the governing body of that series. ACO was only the organizer of Le Mans, and since the importance of the race, obviously was included in the rules making processes. FIA does not govern Le Mans Series. Big difference.

Spectator point of view? What does this mean?!

We are spectators. For a spectator faster car is better. I just meant I didn't completely agree with all the speed reducement and plans ACO has now made, but partly they were needed because of the crashes.

Yes, it’s the highest ECONOMICAL level of motorsport. Not certainly for other reasons (technical).

To repeat, here are my points then:

F1 is pinnacle of motorsport because:
-technical aspects
-level of competition
-manufacturer involvement
-money involvement
-media attention
-every young boy who races karts has a goal to be F1 driver some day

Especially the last two points are important and are result of all the other points.

I don't think you don't like Sportscars! But we are having a discussion about technology in motorsport, today. Sportscars and F1 have always been rivals. But I think actual Sportscars are more technological than actual F1.

[deggis]

Originally Posted by Dario911

If you follow F1, the answer is clear: they're not as organized as Ferrari and McLaren. They are based in Japan, but their motorsport are based in Europe, so the things are not the same. There are more logistic troubles, that makes harder for Japanese engineers to follow the development of the car. Imagine Ferrari or McLaren in the same conditions. Things would be the same.
You must add to this the instability of the technical department in Toyota and Honda.

Not sure if I understood what you mean, but Toyota F1 factory/headquarters is in Cologne (Germany) and Honda's in Brackley (United Kingdom).

Originally Posted by Dario911

This new has been reported in several occasions by Autosprint, and it's referred only to Le Mans budget of the Audi R10 TDI.

Thanks. If it's true, then I must say bigger than I would have thought.