Le Mans Series Le Castellet 8 Hours report and slideshow ...

[Wouter Melissen]

This weekend the 2010 Le Mans Series kicked off with the championship's first ever race at the High Speed Test Track Paul Ricard on the French Cote d'Azur. With its very long straight the sophisticated circuit provides ideal conditions to prepare for the all important 24 Hours of Le Mans in June. The 'Le Castellet 8 Hours' saw the debut of Audi's R15 plus, which was built to comply with the new regulations and also to regain an edge over rivals Peugeot. With a privately entered 908 HDI Fap on hand, the new Audi could immediately show its worth. Other newcomers in the 41-car strong field were the BMW M3 GTR, boasting a special 'ACO' specification and the Acura ARX-01, which in 'c' specification is now known as the HPD ARX-01c.
With the Audi and Peugeot swapping fastest times in the various practice and qualifying sessions, it promised to be a very close race. It was not to be but further down the order there was enough action to keep everybody on the edges of their seats. The tone has certainly been set for what promises to be a very exciting season.
As usual the event's support program included the Classic Endurance Racing (CER) series with a race on Saturday afternoon. A startling 63 historic sports racers of the 1960s and '70s lined up for the one-hour race. The very diverse grid included Porsches ranging from 906s to a very rare 936, Lolas, Chevrons and the unique Duckhams. To spare the engines, the CER used a slightly different configuration of the track, which included a chicane halfway through the 1.2 km long straight.
We were at the Paul Ricard from the first to the last minute and have spent many hours either on the trackside or in the pit-lane. Our findings have been compressed in a detailed report and an exclusive 190-shot gallery filled with all the action from the Le Mans Series and Classic Endurance Racing races.

Le Mans Series Le Castellet 8 Hours report and slideshow

[RacingManiac]

Wallpaper or maybe Hi-res pics in the hide-out?

Nice shots and report!

[LotusLocost]

Superb article and very hot slideshow!
As mentioned above me, many of these shots is wall-paper material!
Great work guys!

[Chernaudi]

Excellent article and photos. I wonder what the impressions are of the new Audi R15 and the works-supported Oreca 908 and what can be inferred from this for Spa and LM, if anything-it seemed that the Audi had an edge in handling and braking, and even to an extent in straightline speed at times.

Also, it seems that the Peugeot's still have some problems with reliabity, even not counting the Oreca Pug's air jack problems(and why did it take 20 minutes to fix where as Audi had a similar problem at Sebring in '09 and fixed it in about 20-30 seconds-Oreca getting used to the 908, or is the Pug hard to work on?). It seems that the Oreca 908 blew an engine in a private test, and the factory team has had problems with cracking tubs since '08 and it seems that the 908 has had minium development since last year.

Audi on the other hand extensively revised the R15 to improve its straightline speed, ease of use(driver and crew)and have a more adjustable and adaptable car. If Audi could by the end of '09 at PLM get the R15 to double stint it's tires, the new car should have even better tire wear, and is probably easier to drive even at this early stage, and has plenty of development potential, while it seems that Peugeot may be hitting a wall R&D-wise. On top of that, R15's have survived 24 and 30 hour endurance tests at Sebring, which makes similar tests at Paul Ricard look like cake walks.

In short, how much better of a position is Audi in now compared to this time last year, and how much gas in the tank does Peugeot and the 908 have to answer to the new challenge from Audi?

[LTSmash]

Great article and shots.

Will Peugeot and Audi still contest the LMS after Spa?

[Wouter Melissen]

Great article and shots.

Will Peugeot and Audi still contest the LMS after Spa?

Thanks for the kind words guys.

Audi will race at Silverstone for sure as that is the start of the Intercontinental Cup.

[henk4]

Excellent article and photos. I wonder what the impressions are of the new Audi R15 and the works-supported Oreca 908 and what can be inferred from this for Spa and LM, if anything-it seemed that the Audi had an edge in handling and braking, and even to an extent in straightline speed at times.

Also, it seems that the Peugeot's still have some problems with reliabity, even not counting the Oreca Pug's air jack problems(and why did it take 20 minutes to fix where as Audi had a similar problem at Sebring in '09 and fixed it in about 20-30 seconds-Oreca getting used to the 908, or is the Pug hard to work on?). It seems that the Oreca 908 blew an engine in a private test, and the factory team has had problems with cracking tubs since '08 and it seems that the 908 has had minium development since last year.

Audi on the other hand extensively revised the R15 to improve its straightline speed, ease of use(driver and crew)and have a more adjustable and adaptable car. If Audi could by the end of '09 at PLM get the R15 to double stint it's tires, the new car should have even better tire wear, and is probably easier to drive even at this early stage, and has plenty of development potential, while it seems that Peugeot may be hitting a wall R&D-wise. On top of that, R15's have survived 24 and 30 hour endurance tests at Sebring, which makes similar tests at Paul Ricard look like cake walks.

In short, how much better of a position is Audi in now compared to this time last year, and how much gas in the tank does Peugeot and the 908 have to answer to the new challenge from Audi?

IMHO Peugeot should have come out in full force (and not only send Sarrazin) to fight the lonely R15. They choose not to, and gave Audi an important moral boost. Audi during the pressconference admitted that one of mistakes they made last year was not enough testing of the R15 under racing conditions. This has been an important race and win for them. They did push the car hard throughout the race, as the Pug did not manage to claw a single lap back after their first pitstop disaster. (They changed the hydraulic pump at the rearend of the car, and they actually had to use manpower to lift the car high enough to put a jack underneath it, allowing a man to work on the bottomside. They choose to replace the part, in stead of loosing time at every pitstop, by jacking up the car manually)
As far as Peugeot is concerned and in fairness to them, they could have skipped the season after the 2009 win and thoroughly develop the 2011 car, but they probably opted for the LMS win with the Oreca car, the only diesel that will do all five LMS races. (The car is reportedly chassis #3, so already in use since 2007). Audi in stead has produced a one season only R15 that most likely will bring them the victory they most want.

Spa will tell us more, but based on what I observed in Le Castellet, the Audi for me is the clear favourite. We still don't know the absolute speed difference, as both teams used their slower driver for the qualification laps.

[Chernaudi]

Well, Audi basically used qualifying as a fourth practice session, but how many times have they done that in the past in the ALMS/LMS over the years? Oreca probably did the same.

But what does the hydraulics have to do with the air jacks(a pnumatic system)? Do the hydraulics actulate the air pump(you own a Citroen, who've been reknown for their hydraulics on their cars since basically forever)?

Maybe Citroen should do the hydraulics on the 908, and I've always wondered why Peugeot went with such a system. Everything on the Audi is eletronic or electro-pnumatic-less mess and easier to fix and maintain appearantly(in World War II, the USAAF bomber crews prefered the B-17 to the B-24, because the B-17 was more durable and easier to repair, in part because of the servo/electronically actualated devices, while the B-24 was described as a plumber's nightmare with it's hydraulics). Also, hydraulics are heavier and probably contributed to the fact that the lightest example of the 908 weight was 920kgs(at Sebring last year), and that Audi needed a huge amount of ballast for the R15 to make 900kgs, let alone the 930 that it's raced at since Le Mans last year.

I was looking also for impressions about how the Audi and Pug stacked up compared to each other. In videos from Monza testing, the Audi seemed to have the edge under braking and cornering, but from what I've read, the R15 was also slightly faster down the Mistral striaght in practice(by about 6km/h or a little over 3mph). It seems that the R15 2010 may be a little faster everywhere(corners and straights), and maybe easier to drive(slightly less torque and most of it is spread more evenly though the power curve, and assuredly the R15 has better weight distribution, reportedly similar to the R8).

If Audi has a trouble free race at Spa and LM and run competitive times with all 3 factory cars, they should give Peugeot some big time pains, and I hope that for Peugeot that with their head factory driver being outpaced by the Audi by as much as nearly .7 of a lap at Paul Ricard when he was in a car of the same spec as the factory machinery and supported by the factory, that Paul Ricard is a wake up call for Peugeot if they want to win LM this year now that Audi seems to be in a position to really put the screws to them on home ground.

And what of Peugeot's plans for after Le Mans? They said that they want to run 5 races(Sebring, Spa, LM, and two more later this year), but those two other races(Silverstone and Shanghi if included in the LMIC/AsLMS), are part of the LMIC, which Peugeot doesn't have scheduled, but Audi does for this year after LM. But may Peugeot commit to the LMIC of LM goes badly for them?

[henk4]

To be honest, the word "hydraulics" was used to describe the problems, it could well have been something pneumatic. I was standing in their box to watch the proceedings, and they removed the rear wing and replaced "something" situated right below the central attachment points of the wing. As views of the engine compartment of the Pug have been notoriously difficult to come by, I am not sure what the actual part was, and after I made some shots I was kindly asked to leave the box.......(I think the hydraulics on my car are a far cry away from what is used on the Pug)

[Chernaudi]

From what I've seen from the videos from Paul Ricard, it seemed that the Audi was for the most part more composed than the 908 in braking and cornering(confirms what I've said before), and overall straightline speed between the Audi, Pug, and Aston Martin are about the same(early in the event, the R15 had to draft the AM Lola to be sure of getting by). However, the handling braking edge goes to Audi, and the Audi and the Pug seem to have the low and mid range over the AMR(Top end is about the same, but the diesels have more low and mid range torque, which helps with accelleration, and is a triat the turbocharged engines-gas or diesel-have. In other words, remember the R8?).

I also have to give Woulter props for catching the R15's front diffuser(saw the photo at Mulsannescorner.com) and it's vortex generators, and for confirming that Audi has definitivly gotten rid of the internal channel bodywork kit on the new R15-that should help with engine bay air circulation/cooling as that wasn't possible on the channel car due to packaging, and considering that the R15 M2010 doesn't have the louvered sidepods that the old R15, or that the R10 or 908 had.

[LTSmash]

From what I've seen from the videos from Paul Ricard

Where are you finding these videos? Please post a link as I would like to see some footage of the LMS.

[Chernaudi]

I found that the LMS did have a podcast video that showed some of the race action on a page on Facebook, but here's the actual site that made it for them: HOME

I'd also refer you to this video of the R15's testing a Monza for a better picture of what I mean: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaOLIKe5Cx8]YouTube - 2010 Audi R15 LMP1 Test Monza[/ame]

And compare this to the 908, especially in the parabolica: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS8f-KSAJnw]YouTube - 2010 Peugeot 908 HDI LMP1 Test Monza[/ame]

It seems that Audi in full race mode has the edge over the 908 in handling and braking, and seemingly in straightline speed, which equaled over .6 of an advantage over the 908's in the fastest lap competetion during the race, and it seemed that the Audi drivers were pretty satisfied with the new R15, especialy near the end of the race, and that they've only started to exploit the R15's potential now.

[Chernaudi]

I was just re-reading the intro to this story, and I have a common misconception that I'd like to bring to attention.

The reasoning behind the Audi getting rid of the channel bodywork on the R15 wasn't due to ACO rules changes, but was entirely their own decidsion. The louvres in the rear fenders of the R15 have nothing to do with the channels. This diagram shows how the channels worked: Le Mans 2009: Audi R15 TDI | Sportscar | Racecar Engineering

As you can see, the wheel well(and hence the rear fender wheel well exits) are blocked off from the channels to increase their efficency. Audi added the fender louvers as the Audi R15 Plus is being used in part as a test bed for their 2011 car, where a high downforce/low drag body will be most useful if the ACO proceed with their engine downsizing plans.

The problem with the channels is more fundimental than a rules change. And that fundimental problem is that the channels simply made too much drag for Le Mans and any track where strightline speed is of importance(Le Mans, Paul Ricard, Road America, et al), and lacked the adjustability of more conventional methods of creating downforce.

It's a simple matter of fundimental areodynamics: Most race cars are designed with a range of drag that they want to be in the ballpark of. Once there, they then add some downforce to get the baseline balance they want, and from there they add downforce for shorter tracks, and let the drag then be what it becomes. That's how the R8, R10, and R15 Plus were designed.

On the original R15, the car was designed to meet a ballpark downforce range, and the drag was what it was. Problem was that trying to reduce drag became a problem with the channels, as they were perfect for the ALMS or most LMS(where drag is a secondary concern to downforce on the areo end), but at LM, the channel bodywork was certinaly no free lunch, and cause more drag than was needed for the downforce produced; that equalled a nearly 10mph speed gap to the more conventional 908s, which equalled 1-3 seconds a lap early in the race. By the time Audi got their R15s dialed in, the gap was insurmoutable combined with the other problems they had with overheating(which the Plus has also, hopefully, adressed, as it did a 30 hour test at Sebring in 80+ degree weather).

So the channels aren't illegal, and ACO rules changes had nothing to do with it. The decision for Audi to abandon the channel concept on the R15 was based on their own problems with the concept and trying to get it to work the way they wanted. It seems that Audi went for the Porsche RS Spyder/Acura ARX-02 areo concept but with reduced drag and better adjustablity, as the R15 at Paul Ricard seemed to have the edge over the 908 as far as grip, handling, and braking, while equalling(and sometimes exceeding) straightline speed.

Hence, in short, rules had nothing to do with the channels being gone from the R15, but that, for LM at least, it was a flawed concept to begin with. The R15 has potential now for Acura ARX-02 levels of downforce, but with less drag and more engine to push the car, and that can only bode well for Audi, especialy at Le Mans and the LMIC. It seems to have better ballance, more consistant, easier to drive, and a better all 'round car, which is like the R8 was, and that's what Audi seems to be aiming for.

[RacingManiac]

The Lola P2 car still uses the principle as Audi's channel now....(P1 with the cooling requirement with bigger rad can't.)

Mulsanne's Corner: 2005-2009 Lola LMP2
(old car, but same design still exist)

It's still a drag reduction feature I think, since the idea is to fill the wake of the car. But either Audi used it for almost as a double diffuser where they are actually using it with conjunction with the bodywork to make downforce, or with the redesigned side-pod it can no longer be packaged. I am leaning towards the latter.

I think most of the drag issue is with the front end and the louvered sidepods.....the channels don't work with their redesign so they were dumped.

[Chernaudi]

Not if the rear suspension gets in the way. The Lola is an LMP2 car, where you can get away with downforce since they're so down on power anyways, and the Lola otherwise is a low downforce design-look how fast the Intersport Lola has been known to go in the ALMS, and it has been known for keeping up with Audi R10s on top end.

I refer to the 3/15/10(3/17/10) entry at Mulsanne's corner.com. Granted, Mike didn't design the R15 obviously, but he has had sources within Audi Sport confrim to him that the channel bodywork didn't work as planned, and the fundimental design flaw in it's concept: Mulsanne's Corner News, March/April 2010

To quote: "The twin channel concept came about through a different method of deriving the car's aero target. In the past the the drag level was set and the package was developed by adjusting the target L/D. But the new method of thinking set a target range of downforce and again L/D was adjusted as needed with drag being what it was for the given L/D. But the problem was the amount of drag that the rear channel concept contributed, even it it was efficient from a downforce standpoint. And if Le Mans was your goal this wasn't really the route you'd head in. Now on the other hand, if you were interested in racing at venues such as your typical ALMS track, then you'd tend to want to have a look at the channel concept as it was very efficient if only considering very high downforce setups."

And that's the basic flaw-the channel concept was designed with the ALMS in mind, but those plans changed before the '09 season. And even then, Audi struggled with the channels to reduce drag and ultimately ran a compromised suspension set up on the R15 to restore the areo balance and promote front tire life. Fortunatly, by PLM, Audi developed a set up that allowed the front tires to live though a double stint at an ALMS race without performance drop off, and that's helped the R15 Plus as well.

Audi went back to basics with the R15 2010, and it's helped-they've lost some of their braking and cornering advantage(downforce losses), but their advantage over Peugeot in that area still seems to be significant, and they're matching the 908's speeds on the 3/4 mile(1.2 km) Mistral straight during the weekend on a fairly consistant basis, which was a R10 and R15 weakness. That, and the R15 can now use it's tires to the full without overly abusing them, which isn't a Peugeot strong point(could barely double stint at Sebring '09, especially when pushed, were marginal triple stinting at LM last year, and couldn't double stint at PLM last year either) due to their rear weight bias, and rock hard suspension set ups with the possible use of inerter dampers/J dampers.

To sum it up, I'll quote Mike again to make it short and sweet: "But as downforce was taken off it became less and less efficient, thus at the opposite end of the spectrum this aspect of the R15's design concept couldn't 'pay' for it's ride at all."

And that does sum it up. In the ALMS, the channel concept would've been worth its weight in gold, silver, and platnum. But at LM and several tracks with straights of over .5 of a mile or nearly a kilometer in lenght or longer, it was worth its weight in bouvine manure, especially when Peugeot was involved in the events.

Simply put, Audi is going with a concept as old as the R8, and similar to the Porsche RS Spyder and the Acura ARX-02: Hit a drag figure, and add downforce as needed, as well as using low drag methods of downforce increases. The changes to the front diffuser were to placate Peugeot and take advantage of the 30mm trailing edge for asymmetrical diffuser profiles more than anything else(single piece diffusers will be manditory for 2011 onwards anyways), though with the channel concept abandoned, the nose chimney in its original forms and the twin piece front diffuser were basically redundant.