2024 Le Mans race thread
Discussion
CLK-GTR said:
The fastest trap reading of the weekend was set by the #4 Porsche. They had the speed.
Somewhat misleading though, that lap was a complete outlierThe 4 set the equal fastest top speed with the two Toyotas, however it set that on lap 7 and its next fastest laps were way slower than the Toyotas and Ferraris
The 5 & 6 best top speeds were way below Toyota, Ferrari, Peugeot, BMW and one of the Alpines and Lambos
They were 7 & 8 kph down on the Toyotas and the 6 was only 17th fastest in the top speed list
Toyota top 5 laps average 342.1
No 4 Penske Porsche average 337.1
No 6 Penske Porsche average 334.1
8 Toyota 342.6
50 Ferrari 340.6
83 Ferrari 340.9
51 Ferrari 338.9
Aside from the top speeds Penske Porsche need to have a re think about a couple of things
Who is calling their strategy? He got it spectacularly wrong more than once with both the 5 & 6 over the course of the race
Driver line ups
I doubt we will see Lotterer back in that car next year. Hes had a great career and is still a safe pair of hands, but his best last was 2 seconds off both Estre and Vanthoor
The winning Ferrari only had a 0.7 spread between the 3 drivers
I think the same applies for Mako in the No 5 car, though he was only a second off Campbell and Christensen
Who is calling their strategy? He got it spectacularly wrong more than once with both the 5 & 6 over the course of the race
Driver line ups
I doubt we will see Lotterer back in that car next year. Hes had a great career and is still a safe pair of hands, but his best last was 2 seconds off both Estre and Vanthoor
The winning Ferrari only had a 0.7 spread between the 3 drivers
I think the same applies for Mako in the No 5 car, though he was only a second off Campbell and Christensen
freedman said:
Aside from the top speeds Penske Porsche need to have a re think about a couple of things
Who is calling their strategy? He got it spectacularly wrong more than once with both the 5 & 6 over the course of the race
Driver line ups
I doubt we will see Lotterer back in that car next year. Hes had a great career and is still a safe pair of hands, but his best last was 2 seconds off both Estre and Vanthoor
The winning Ferrari only had a 0.7 spread between the 3 drivers
I think the same applies for Mako in the No 5 car, though he was only a second off Campbell and Christensen
I think their pace variation is as much to do with strategy and drivers as the car. The car has the speed in the right hands and right conditions. They perhaps have too many cars. They want the 963 to be a proper customer car business as opposed to Ferrari who are offering the 499P as an afterthought and Toyota who don't even do that.Who is calling their strategy? He got it spectacularly wrong more than once with both the 5 & 6 over the course of the race
Driver line ups
I doubt we will see Lotterer back in that car next year. Hes had a great career and is still a safe pair of hands, but his best last was 2 seconds off both Estre and Vanthoor
The winning Ferrari only had a 0.7 spread between the 3 drivers
I think the same applies for Mako in the No 5 car, though he was only a second off Campbell and Christensen
Both of those have well settled crews who are good, consistent endurance racers and have been racing together for years in various cars. #83 is the training car for Ferrari but both the youngsters are carefully picked (from Porsche in Ye's case) and Kubica is probably the most talented driver on the grid to guide them. His stint in the lead was the drive of the weekend for me.
Porsche has a huge pool of drivers and has seemingly randomly allocated them to cars in the hope sheer numbers will get them across the line. Some dont have the pace, others like Estre are mesmerisingly quick but not exactly careful with the car. I'd focus two or three cars around guys like Matt Campbell and I don't know why Richard Lietz hasn't been promoted yet.
CLK-GTR said:
I think their pace variation is as much to do with strategy and drivers as the car. The car has the speed in the right hands and right conditions. They perhaps have too many cars. They want the 963 to be a proper customer car business as opposed to Ferrari who are offering the 499P as an afterthought and Toyota who don't even do that.
Both of those have well settled crews who are good, consistent endurance racers and have been racing together for years in various cars. #83 is the training car for Ferrari but both the youngsters are carefully picked (from Porsche in Ye's case) and Kubica is probably the most talented driver on the grid to guide them. His stint in the lead was the drive of the weekend for me.
Porsche has a huge pool of drivers and has seemingly randomly allocated them to cars in the hope sheer numbers will get them across the line. Some dont have the pace, others like Estre are mesmerisingly quick but not exactly careful with the car. I'd focus two or three cars around guys like Matt Campbell and I don't know why Richard Lietz hasn't been promoted yet.
Lietz isnt going to get promoted now! even though I think he is fantastic. I think they moved Jani and Pilet out of the factory roster too soon as wellBoth of those have well settled crews who are good, consistent endurance racers and have been racing together for years in various cars. #83 is the training car for Ferrari but both the youngsters are carefully picked (from Porsche in Ye's case) and Kubica is probably the most talented driver on the grid to guide them. His stint in the lead was the drive of the weekend for me.
Porsche has a huge pool of drivers and has seemingly randomly allocated them to cars in the hope sheer numbers will get them across the line. Some dont have the pace, others like Estre are mesmerisingly quick but not exactly careful with the car. I'd focus two or three cars around guys like Matt Campbell and I don't know why Richard Lietz hasn't been promoted yet.
I dont agree about throwing them in, they have pretty stable line ups, its just that they don't have the fastest 3 in the same car
I'd replace Lotterer with Cambell and they need to go back and get Andlauer back in the factory set up
Yes they want to sell cars, but it looks like the success of WEC is going to lead to that being a bit of a dead duck as a business, as they wont allow 4/5 Porsches if they could have an additional manufacturer instead
freedman said:
Lietz isnt going to get promoted now! even though I think he is fantastic. I think they moved Jani and Pilet out of the factory roster too soon as well
I dont agree about throwing them in, they have pretty stable line ups, its just that they don't have the fastest 3 in the same car
I'd replace Lotterer with Cambell and they need to go back and get Andlauer back in the factory set up
Yes they want to sell cars, but it looks like the success of WEC is going to lead to that being a bit of a dead duck as a business, as they wont allow 4/5 Porsches if they could have an additional manufacturer instead
Can't say i know why Lietz cant be promoted considering there are older drivers in there than him, but apparently he's not interested in driving the Hypercars.I dont agree about throwing them in, they have pretty stable line ups, its just that they don't have the fastest 3 in the same car
I'd replace Lotterer with Cambell and they need to go back and get Andlauer back in the factory set up
Yes they want to sell cars, but it looks like the success of WEC is going to lead to that being a bit of a dead duck as a business, as they wont allow 4/5 Porsches if they could have an additional manufacturer instead
If they swapped Campbell into the #6 car thats all of a sudden a very capable lineup with good qualifying pace and consistent drivers all round. Not sure what you do with the other Penske cars though. As you say 7 of 9 Ferrari drivers managed a 3:29.x lap and Schwartzmann and Kubica were close. Porsche had guys down near the 3:32s. I know there are variables but if they want to win they need more competitive drivers grouped into the cars.
freedman said:
CLK-GTR said:
The fastest trap reading of the weekend was set by the #4 Porsche. They had the speed.
Somewhat misleading though, that lap was a complete outlierThe 4 set the equal fastest top speed with the two Toyotas, however it set that on lap 7 and its next fastest laps were way slower than the Toyotas and Ferraris
The 5 & 6 best top speeds were way below Toyota, Ferrari, Peugeot, BMW and one of the Alpines and Lambos
They were 7 & 8 kph down on the Toyotas and the 6 was only 17th fastest in the top speed list
Toyota top 5 laps average 342.1
No 4 Penske Porsche average 337.1
No 6 Penske Porsche average 334.1
8 Toyota 342.6
50 Ferrari 340.6
83 Ferrari 340.9
51 Ferrari 338.9
richhead said:
top speed is a fairly meaningless number, it doesnt hurt to be fast on a straight, but a km or two doesnt make alot of difference, its the slow bits that matter more.
Its hardly a meaningless number if you are as fast in the corners but then cant pass as easily on the straights And being 6-8 KPH down on average as the 963s were against Toyota and Ferrari with a very long straight, as at LM, its a significant disadvantage
richhead said:
top speed is a fairly meaningless number, it doesnt hurt to be fast on a straight, but a km or two doesnt make alot of difference, its the slow bits that matter more.
On some circuits true but at Le Mans it's surely more of a factor where so much of the circuit is taken at full pelt! richhead said:
top speed is a fairly meaningless number, it doesnt hurt to be fast on a straight, but a km or two doesnt make alot of difference, its the slow bits that matter more.
Top speed was the reason the Cadillacs went backwards at the start. They were 5km/h down on the long straights and other Hypercars were driving past them. It does matter at Le Mans.Penske have done pretty well with them everywhere else this season, unlike Ferrari.
I think Ferrari sandbagged the BoP, possibly even elsewhere, in the knowledge that LM is the one. The car was able to make up gaps and switch it up whenever needed. I actually thought the strongest team performance was probably Toyota.
If anyone needs to change the team, then surely Peugeot and, arguably BMW, are further up the list.
Someone should be ringing Prodrive!
I think Ferrari sandbagged the BoP, possibly even elsewhere, in the knowledge that LM is the one. The car was able to make up gaps and switch it up whenever needed. I actually thought the strongest team performance was probably Toyota.
If anyone needs to change the team, then surely Peugeot and, arguably BMW, are further up the list.
Someone should be ringing Prodrive!
ettore said:
Penske have done pretty well with them everywhere else this season, unlike Ferrari.
I think Ferrari sandbagged the BoP, possibly even elsewhere, in the knowledge that LM is the one. The car was able to make up gaps and switch it up whenever needed. I actually thought the strongest team performance was probably Toyota.
If anyone needs to change the team, then surely Peugeot and, arguably BMW, are further up the list.
Someone should be ringing Prodrive!
I am not sure Ferrari have sandbagged, I think they have designed the car for top speed, with the aim of winning Le Mans. They have not won any other WEC races, where ultimate top speed is not so important. I think Ferrari sandbagged the BoP, possibly even elsewhere, in the knowledge that LM is the one. The car was able to make up gaps and switch it up whenever needed. I actually thought the strongest team performance was probably Toyota.
If anyone needs to change the team, then surely Peugeot and, arguably BMW, are further up the list.
Someone should be ringing Prodrive!
Le Mans has always been about speed on the Mulsanne, over the years Le Mans special bodywork has been developed by many teams to give them an advantage purely for the one race.
Bit puzzled by Toyota as number 7 was really bad at start and consistently at back of Hypercar field - latched a bit of too speed but surprisingly competitive fir last 2/3rds of race.
Gravel traps are much better in dry as when there flooded or very wet they don’t stop much.
I also called it a night just after 3am and did see loads of fans on banking hunkering down in plastic but with weather forecasts should surely have stopped race for a while or started racing an hour or so sooner.
Getting racing after safety car period still takes too long - if it’s just barrier repairs at one place on circuit surely you can go down to 1 SC near end of repairs by speeding up two SCs a bit for 80% of lap.
Gravel traps are much better in dry as when there flooded or very wet they don’t stop much.
I also called it a night just after 3am and did see loads of fans on banking hunkering down in plastic but with weather forecasts should surely have stopped race for a while or started racing an hour or so sooner.
Getting racing after safety car period still takes too long - if it’s just barrier repairs at one place on circuit surely you can go down to 1 SC near end of repairs by speeding up two SCs a bit for 80% of lap.
Burrow01 said:
ettore said:
Penske have done pretty well with them everywhere else this season, unlike Ferrari.
I think Ferrari sandbagged the BoP, possibly even elsewhere, in the knowledge that LM is the one. The car was able to make up gaps and switch it up whenever needed. I actually thought the strongest team performance was probably Toyota.
If anyone needs to change the team, then surely Peugeot and, arguably BMW, are further up the list.
Someone should be ringing Prodrive!
I am not sure Ferrari have sandbagged, I think they have designed the car for top speed, with the aim of winning Le Mans. They have not won any other WEC races, where ultimate top speed is not so important. I think Ferrari sandbagged the BoP, possibly even elsewhere, in the knowledge that LM is the one. The car was able to make up gaps and switch it up whenever needed. I actually thought the strongest team performance was probably Toyota.
If anyone needs to change the team, then surely Peugeot and, arguably BMW, are further up the list.
Someone should be ringing Prodrive!
Le Mans has always been about speed on the Mulsanne, over the years Le Mans special bodywork has been developed by many teams to give them an advantage purely for the one race.
Sandbagging or 'managing' is pretty much de rigeur in the build up to LM. I knew the principal of one of the old GTE teams and they were extremely careful about specific sector times!
For the record, I'm not criticising Ferrari, it's part of the game.
ettore said:
They've nearly won a couple but I think we're making the same point. LM is the focus, so they've carefully been 'managing' their ultimate pace to ensure a decent BoP for LM. BoP for LM is specific, for obvious reasons, and the AOC announced an additional element (speed above 250kph) just before the race - I suspect this is a result of Ferrari's approach.
Sandbagging or 'managing' is pretty much de rigeur in the build up to LM. I knew the principal of one of the old GTE teams and they were extremely careful about specific sector times!
For the record, I'm not criticising Ferrari, it's part of the game.
Ferrari have had the pace (when they wanted to) in the previous rounds of the WEC but they appeared to have seconded a few strategists from the F1 team.Sandbagging or 'managing' is pretty much de rigeur in the build up to LM. I knew the principal of one of the old GTE teams and they were extremely careful about specific sector times!
For the record, I'm not criticising Ferrari, it's part of the game.
It comes down to how much the FIA want Ferrari in the championship and I suspect the answer is 'a lot'. Hopefully long gone are the days where Audi, Toyota etc would win by virtue of being the only car on the grid.
CLK-GTR said:
Hopefully long gone are the days where Audi, Toyota etc would win by virtue of being the only car on the grid.
It was very nice seeing a proper competition of it.Possibly silly question, but regarding top speed, don't (or can't) these cars run adjustable wings / other aero, so they can 'tune' the car's characteristics depending on circuit? At which point the strengths and weaknesses are surely adjustable to some degree when chasing lap-time, and if your chosen design delivers the fastest laps with a low top-speed*, then that's down to your aerodynamicists / chosen package, not down to competitors sandbagging more than you?
* A-la Red Bull F1.
732NM said:
They have different aero configurations and adjustable wing levels. Nothing is allowed to be altered on the move, such as DRS.
I think the days of low and high downforce aero packages went when Hypercar regs came in. If I remember correctly its a fixed config, with a element (such as the wing) to allow you to tune balance to the circuit.
732NM said:
They have different aero configurations and adjustable wing levels. Nothing is allowed to be altered on the move, such as DRS.
They're only allowed one adjustable aero device. When the cars are homologated they lock the aero setup in place for 5 years and the FIA use BoP to tweak performance. Gassing Station | Le Mans | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff