"KadeS" (kadesirin)
11/07/2014 at 14:53 • Filed to: None
1
7|
"KadeS" (kadesirin)
11/07/2014 at 14:53 • Filed to: None | 1
| 7 |
So, after much much deliberation and calculation, I have made the decision to create this small little series. Here, I'll be analyzing the differences between LMP1 (prototypes) and F1 (open wheel). I will be taking the vehicles and analyzing them, comparing the technology and equipment utilized in both. Then I'll take the lap times and I'll break them down. That means, sector times, top speeds, average speeds, fuel consumption, all just just to see where these vehicles, at the highest tiers of motorsport, make their time and make their speed.
I am not a motorsport expert. I do not have contacts inside the pits, inside the teams, etc. I'm just doing a comparison for fun, because I both like writing and I like fast cars.
So, here comes the first part. The cars.
Formula 1 introduced a new set of regulations this year. Their engines are fuel flow limited, turbocharged V6s. Their flow rate is limited to a peak of 100kg/hr and is detected through a Gill ultrasonic flow meter. They also have an ERS or energy recovery system, which runs off of the braking energy AND the turbo's energy, this comes to a total of approximately 160 bhp for 33 seconds. Converted, that's (bhp is joules per a second) 3.6 MJ or megajoules that the car can released each lap during a race. This power goes straight to the rear wheels.
Prototype cars come from the World Endurance Championship. Together, the FIA and ACO also came up with a set of new regulations this year. They too work on a fuel flow restricted formula with the flow rate based upon the amount of energy released. The categories are determined by what the ERS option will be at Le Mans. The cars can also have an energy recovery system, though it is up to the manufacture of the vehicle to decide exactly WHAT type of ERS the car will have. The only limit is that there can only be two "energy release" sources.
Without any hybrid systems, the fuel flow rate is 100.9 kg/hr of petrol or 84.6 kg/hr of diesel. An F1 car, with its 3.6 MJ of boost per lap, would have a flow rate of 91.9 kg/hr under the 4 MJ ERS level. During this initial season, two ERS levels have been chosen by the manufacturers. Audi picked 2 MJ, Porsche and Toyota picked 6 MJ. Audi has a diesel powered prototype, Porsche and Toyota are both petrol powered.
In regards to the ERS, Audi R18 has a motor up front powering its front wheels, hence the quattro attachment. It collects energy in a flywheel form the front. Porsche with its 919 has two points of energy collection, the front wheels and a generator attached to its turbo in the back (gaining energy from the turbo heat). This energy is collected in a lithium battery and released through the front wheels. Finally, the Toyota TS040 has two motor generators, one in front and one in back. Both of them go to a supercapcitor next to the driver, which releases the energy back to the front and rear motors.
So, now that we know what the cars are... here's a little breakdown of the information:
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
In addition to this information, we know the F1 cars produce approximately 750 bhp from their engines and ~160 bhp from their hybrid boost. In comparison, LMP1 cars, the TS040, produces ~500 bhp from its engine, and ANOTHER ~500 bhp from its hybrid boost.
Additionally, F1 cars also have DRS; drag reduction systems.
That's it for now (as I have to write up and generate the tables and whatnot), but tomorrow I'll have a comparison in sizes and dimensions. After that, I'll start going into lap times. There's also a bit more technology where this comes from, but I'm out of office time to write this.
Have any comparison requests?
Kudos to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! and a couple others.
ACESandEIGHTS
> KadeS
11/07/2014 at 14:59 |
|
Why did these splinter into different disciplines, the grand prix car and the road car? Was endurance racing such that you had to have a traditional rig that could fit two people? What are the traditional locales where both disciplines converge on the same circuit (e.g. Spa Francorchamps)? Why is F1 the clear pinnacle of motorsport with LMP being relegated to more of an enthusiast's sport?
|
KadeS
> ACESandEIGHTS
11/07/2014 at 15:13 |
|
In order:
1. It all boils down to the regulations. The 24hrs of Le Mans is run by the ACO. It was at one time known as the Grand Prix of Endurance .. and something. Anyways, the race was supposed to show cars that are purchasable by the general public, they're faster and sporty (hence sports car) but they aren't specifically designed to be racing cars.
2. Endurance racing is racing designed to test a vehicle that COULD sold to the general public. The regulations that require a vehicle to be able to seat two people dates back to that historic root.
3. Traditional locales? Spa, Silverstone, Sao Paulo .
4. F1 has the media attention. It has the history and publicity. Plus, you have races that only last about an hour. Two at most. People can sit through that. Endurance racing (LMP) lasts 4 to 6 hours, with some going as far as 12, or 24 like the 24hrs of Le Mans. Most people don't have the attention for it.
RallyWrench
> ACESandEIGHTS
11/07/2014 at 15:20 |
|
"Sports Cars" traditionally required 2 seats, or provisions for them, lighting, and a trunk space for an FIA-regulation size "suitcase". Things diverged greatly around 1955 when Mercedes exploited the fairly open rules & bolted an enclosed streamliner body onto the W196 F1 car & whipped everyone at the fast tracks. Also, F1 engines & cars traditionally have no chance of lasting 24 hours. They're built for outright speed for a brief period of time, whereas endurance cars are designed to last. In recent years, the outright pace of LMPs is such that even 24 hour races are a long sprint race. It's just amazing.
F1 is often regarded as the pinnacle of motorsport, but for my money, LMPs are the most advanced racing machines on the planet, with the most relevance to road car development. F1 exists to serve itself. LMP makes the world better.
Jordaneer, The Mountaineer Man
> KadeS
11/07/2014 at 15:29 |
|
Damn I'm looking forward to the rest of this series, great writeup, i personally would want to race Le Mans if I had the choice, but wouldn't turn down F1 if given the chance.
do you think in general F1 is faster than LeMans? i know that they are built for different circuits, where an f1 car could never run on the LeMans circuit with the muslanne straight, but in your opinion, which is faster?
|
KadeS
> Jordaneer, The Mountaineer Man
11/07/2014 at 16:13 |
|
In general, F1 cars are faster than Le Mans cars. That is a fact. Now, an F1 car could probably run on the Le Sarthe, but its top speed would be lower than an LMP car; they're not designed to go fast in a straight line, they're designed to go fast period. Plus they might not last a lap with being at full throttle for so long....
R Saldana [|Oo|======|oO|] - BTC/ETH/LTC Prophet
> Jordaneer, The Mountaineer Man
11/07/2014 at 16:27 |
|
They both run at Spa, Suzuka, and Hockenheim
|
KadeS
> R Saldana [|Oo|======|oO|] - BTC/ETH/LTC Prophet
11/07/2014 at 23:35 |
|
LMP1 cars no longer run at Suzuka or Hockenheim, though next year they'll run at the Nurburgring GP circuit.