I saw this in popular mechanics. Its a split screen of the same stretch of track, one half is track day cars, other half is formula 1. Its crazy when you actually get a reference point to understand the speed of these things.
I saw this in popular mechanics. Its a split screen of the same stretch of track, one half is track day cars, other half is formula 1. Its crazy when you actually get a reference point to understand the speed of these things.
That's a classic.
That's crazy... 
Still amazing.
Very cool
What interests me is LMP1 vs F1. The F1 cars are a bit faster, but have much shorter tire life. Assuming you could refuel an F1 car (following Le Mans rules, which includes shutting off the car while fueling), would the LMP1 cars eventually take the lead in an endurance race?
In reply to Keith Tanner:
Interesting, but would we be getting into the aspect of driver changes? The LMP1 cars are designed for it, compared to F1, IIRC, the cars are tailored to the driver. Custom molded seats and such.
I think we'd have to include that. A quadruple stint at Le Mans is about 3 hours (14 laps/stint at 3:20/lap, which is also 470 miles). So let's assume driver changes, but the drivers can be identical twins 
Let's also assume the F1 driver is able to see in the dark.
The LMP cars are slower than the F1 cars partly because of the compromises required by their type of racing, so really the question is "when do these compromises pay off?"
The setup for Le Mans would also be interesting in an F1 car, as there's a huge range of speeds. Maximum speeds are about 20 mph faster than they are at the Canadian F1 track. But let's also ignore that.
Some drivers do double and triple stints in sports cars that lead to longer time in the cockpit than an F1 race. Sports cars also have molded seats, the drivers swap seat inserts on driver changes. F1 could do that.
Sports cars have far better tires than F1 does thanks to the stupid rules insisting on thermal degrading tires in F1. If F1 were allowed free tires they could run faster and longer. Hence Webbers comments when he went to sports cars about them running flat out for hour after hour which just never happens in F1 as they nurse the stupid tires.
The tire degradation isn't as dramatic as it used to be. Has F1 ever had tires in the modern era that could run an entire race, even when they weren't spec tires?
Keith Tanner wrote: What interests me is LMP1 vs F1. The F1 cars are a bit faster, but have much shorter tire life. Assuming you could refuel an F1 car (following Le Mans rules, which includes shutting off the car while fueling), would the LMP1 cars eventually take the lead in an endurance race?
Yes, when the F1 engine went up in smoke if nothing else. They last more than one race these days, but Le Mans is 16 grands prix in a row! As with all real race cars, they're built around the rulebook. Change the rules substantially and the ideal car also changes substantially.
Also, F1 cars aren't just "a bit" faster. If you compare qualifying times last year at Spa (which I believe is the same track configuration used for both F1 and WEC), Hamilton's time was a 1:47.1, whereas the #17 Porsche LMP1 car (dunno who drives that, sorry) was a 1:54.7
Keith Tanner wrote: The tire degradation isn't as dramatic as it used to be. Has F1 ever had tires in the modern era that could run an entire race, even when they weren't spec tires?
In 2005 the tire regs required that they last the entire race, and back in the early 90s you would see cars doing a 0-stopper from time to time (mostly at Monaco).
For most of the time that refueling was legal in F1, the gas tank size wasn't big enough to do an entire race on one tank of fuel. Since the rules allowed you to change tires and fuel at the same time, and fuel took longer than tires (due to max fuel flow rate), changing tires was essentially free. Thus there was no reason to ever develop ones that would last the entire race. That said, the tires of that vintage could do 20-30 qualifying laps in a row (Schumacher used to do this regularly), if you tried that with today's tires they'd be toast in 4 or 5 laps.
With the 2-man, 1-gun, no-work-while-fueling rules at Le Mans, changing tires is very expensive in time. I believe the double, triple, quadruple stinting of tires started around 2000, before that it was common to change them every stop. I'm not sure if that was due to a change in the rules, or just that they hadn't figured out how to make tires that would do it yet.
It's more interesting to compare the average lap times in the race. 2015 F1 race was 1:23:40 for 43 laps, 2016 WEC race was 6:00:32 for 160 laps. That includes pit stops under different rule books (much faster on the F1 cars for tire changes) and refuelling for the WEC. Average lap time for F1 was 1:55.81, average lap time for LMP was 2:15.
So, no question the F1 cars are faster over an F1 distance. Where's the crossover point, with the F1 cars handicapped by F1 tires and the WEC cars handicapped by air conditioning, a luggage rack, etc?
Stuff was insanely fast back in the day as well. But cars are just way way way faster not. Put a F1 car against something like a F40 and it will be even a bigger difference from that video.
Goes both ways though in 1976 T23 McL did one of the first ring races in a F1 car at 7:04 no traffic. There are some street legal cars, Z07, with stereo and sound deadening that you could drive across the country in that can do that now.
wearymicrobe wrote: Stuff was insanely fast back in the day as well. But cars are just way way way faster not. Put a F1 car against something like a F40 and it will be even a bigger difference from that video.
Schumacher's F2004 still holds the lap record at most of the circuits that are still on the calendar. :)
codrus wrote:wearymicrobe wrote: Stuff was insanely fast back in the day as well. But cars are just way way way faster not. Put a F1 car against something like a F40 and it will be even a bigger difference from that video.Schumacher's F2004 still holds the lap record at most of the circuits that are still on the calendar. :)
That is F1 being stupid and not letting it be the apex of tech and driver skill for stuff like weird fuel economy reasons.
codrus wrote:wearymicrobe wrote: Stuff was insanely fast back in the day as well. But cars are just way way way faster not. Put a F1 car against something like a F40 and it will be even a bigger difference from that video.Schumacher's F2004 still holds the lap record at most of the circuits that are still on the calendar. :)
Oh the V12s....
But those records are starting to fall, despite the tires and the significant decrease in fuel consumption. Which is awesome.
z31maniac wrote:codrus wrote:Oh the V12s....wearymicrobe wrote: Stuff was insanely fast back in the day as well. But cars are just way way way faster not. Put a F1 car against something like a F40 and it will be even a bigger difference from that video.Schumacher's F2004 still holds the lap record at most of the circuits that are still on the calendar. :)
That was a V10. The last Ferrari F1 V12 was in '95.
The reasons for the slowdown since then have been cost control and safety.
codrus wrote:z31maniac wrote:That was a V10. The last Ferrari F1 V12 was in '95. The reasons for the slowdown since then have been cost control and safety.codrus wrote:Oh the V12s....wearymicrobe wrote: Stuff was insanely fast back in the day as well. But cars are just way way way faster not. Put a F1 car against something like a F40 and it will be even a bigger difference from that video.Schumacher's F2004 still holds the lap record at most of the circuits that are still on the calendar. :)
Derp. That's right. Montoya I think has the ones that Schumi doesn't.
They need to speed the cars back up. It will be interesting to see what the wider tires do next year. I'd also like to see them give them back some fuel/boost and allow more energy harvesting.
You'll need to log in to post.
