|
|
Pete
Lyons' fantastic Can-Am Cars in Detail:
 |
January/February 2013
Reload
to see the latest news
All news content copyright Michael J. Fuller, unless
otherwise noted |
 |  2.26.13
>>Yesterday
Nissan indicated a long term commitment to Le Mans with the
announcement of a Garage 56 entry for 2014 followed by a future LMP1
effort. The news comes as somewhat of a surprise but seems
to be the next logical step given the DeltaWing as spring board and
Nissan's recent move away from that project (surely it wasn't going to
be one and done, right?). The press releases are filled with the
usual levels of vagueness, but it would seem Nissan's Garage 56 entry
will be all-electric powered with the idea of proving the technology
first, but perhaps more importantly establishing a manner of
equivalency with other competitors within the ACO's regulations, with
the intent on using said technology in a full-fledged LMP1 effort at
some point in the future (2015 or beyond, Nissan says they are moving
to an internal time table but it hasn't been made public).
While
not much is said about the propulsion technology for the Garage 56 entry other than to call it
an, “innovative new powertrain technology,” precious-nothing
is mentioned about what chassis it will be stuck in. Now it would
seem to moot their point if Nissan again goes with a chassis designed outside the
regulations, such as DeltaWing was, especially if they intend to,
“...provide the Automobile Club de l’Ouest (ACO) and the Federation
Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) with data to enable all parties to
evaluate the incorporation of this breakthrough technology.”
And while it has been said the Garage 56 entry will be
all-electric powered, nothing has been said about what would power the
LMP1 other than that it would use the technology developed in the Garage 56 entry. But exclusively
use that technology? It seems pretty clear that all-electric
technology simply isn't mature enough for Le Mans, and still won't be
even 2 years from now. Thus it seems pretty certain Nissan will
look to a “pseudo”-hybrid powered by something like a hydrogen fuel
cell (though one wonders the state of Nissan R&D in this area or any of the leading edge vehicle propulsion technologies).
And this is the ACO's conundrum; their fascination with
diesel technology has now shifted to hybrids (be it gas-electric or
diesel-electric). But like diesels, if a car company doesn't have
relevant experience with hybrids they're out in the cold, at least as
long as the ACO stays smitten to that current narrow window. And
Nissan is adamant that they race technology relevant to their road
cars, says Nissan Head Carlos Ghosn, “We will return to Le Mans with a
vehicle that will act as a high-speed test bed in the harshest of
environments for both our road car and race car electric vehicle
technology.” Nissan's road car hybrids are emerging as we speak
but they aren't nearly as experienced with them as Toyota or
Audi. So what's a company to do? It seems, make an
investment into the technology direction you want to head, present it
to the ACO, and hope it all works out. | |  2.21.13
>>Dyson
tested their Lola B12/60 on Michelin rubber today at Sebring today.
Both Extreme Speed Motorsports and Level 5 Racing were on the
track testing their Acura ARX-03bs as well. |
|  2.19.13* updated
>>The
2013 Toyota TS030 LMP1 was revealed today at Paul Ricard. Looking a
lot like the roll out car from last year (below), it's interesting to
note that Toyota has returned to the closed off front splitter concept.
Reading into the press material and the reason becomes evident; Toyota
has redesigned the front end of the monocoque and eliminated the
alternative front hybrid motor layout. Recall that Toyota had hedged
their bets last year and developed the TS030 monocoque to accept a
front hybrid motor while developing which direction their program would
go with. In the end they went with the rear motor solution meaning the
front motor solution was redundant. But it also meant that given time
and cost constraints Toyota had wait until the off-season to design
that compromise out of the monocoque.
The
elimination of the
front hybrid motor accommodation presumably opens up area/volume in the
diffuser section. Sources also indicate that an effective
front diffuser design takes
into consideration the monocoque's relationship to the diffuser as well
as the beneficial positioning of the front suspension (completely out
of the flow as optimal because the flow separations from the front
suspension are particularly negative on diffuser performance). I
also understand that a closed front
splitter solution is more efficient than an open configuration (such as
what Toyota raced with all season last year and as what Audi introduced
on the R15 and continues to use on the R18). Toyota's
Technical Director
Pascal Vasselon also indicated, "We worked the aerodynamics and air
flow
especially at the front." So we can presume that Toyota has made
large gains at the front aerodynamically. And while the changes
are invisible for the moment, there are indications of related
developments designed to work in conjunction with the changes to the
front diffuser (see below).
It's been noted
that the launch car isn't running the rear wing extensions, but that
would have more to do with the low-drag configuration being tested at
Paul Ricard than anything else. I fully expect to see the extensions
on the high downforce setup (and so too the open splitter, that is,
unless Toyota has developed something else which has been hinted at).
Mr.
Vasselon has indicated additional modifications to the TS030, "It can't
be seen but the monocoque was much changed, especially the front part.
It is also lighter. The driving position has been relocated, giving
greater visibility to drivers. Powertrain and hybrid system are
identical to 2012, but they have been many improvements...The shock
absorbers are different, etc.. Finally, and not least, we have worked
to make mechanical interventions easier to reduce the time spent in the
pits.” |  Paul Ricard Launch 2012.
Note
the original closed splitter solution. Sources indicate the move
to the open-splitter concept before the start of last season was made
because of thoughts that it offered more development potential.
It would appear the Toyota design team has now come full circle. |
|  Paul
Ricard Launch 2013. Not much is different in the rear, about the
only change I've noticed is that the rear wing endplate leading edge
extension (1) has a completely different shape. Any other
differences are setup relevant (rear wing assembly angle and flap angle
for example).
|  Le Mans 2012.
|
|  Toyota
has been testing two different headlight clusters. What's
interesting is that they plug into the same fender shape. On the
smaller cluster (left) note the parting line (1). This defines
where the larger cluster plugs into (below). |  |
|  Paul
Ricard Launch 2013. The front wheel well exit (1) has been
eliminated. Note that the primary turning vane aft of the front
wheel has been modified (2) with a shorter trailing edge and modified
shape in side view. And there is a now a new turning vane (3) that is just inboard and closely nested to the primary. The
small triangular extension to the trailing edge of the front pontoon
fender (4) has made a reappearance. I've also noticed what
could be a new front diffuser strake poking out (5).
The modifications to the turning vanes are to further enhance the performance of the new front diffuser area.
|  Le Mans 2012:
|
| 
|  2.11.13
>>Muscle
Milk put some miles on their new wide-front HPD ARX-03c LMP1 last week
at the annual Sebring pre-season test. I understand the HPD is
using a new power steering unit developed by AIM as the
previous electric-assist KYB unit simply wasn't generating enough
power. Recently Audi and Toyota have begun to use hydraulic power steering systems with the move to wide fronts (also recall that the wide-front-originator 2009 ARX-02a
used a hydraulic unit as well). And for 2013 the ARX-03c is on
the same size fronts as Audi and Toyota (370 mm/710 mm/18"). But
what's interesting about the AIM unit is that it is an electric power
steering system that generates the power needed to handle the wide
fronts. | 
| 2.8.13
 >>Most
will note the total disdain I have for DeltaWing. Hopefully my
opinion is well enough documented that it doesn't need repeating as,
what's the saying, "if you haven't something nice to say it's best to
not say anything at all." That said, with this past week came a
barrage of information about the DeltaWing. It can be read about here. Looking past DeltaWing, for me the takeaway was the Elan Power Products developed, Duratec/MZR-R based, billet-block, single-turbo,
direct injected, 4-cylinder. While the engine specifications are
new information, news of a Elan Power developed engine has been the
rumor mill since December.
 But a particular detail caught my attention, the insinuation of a second
engine being developed that utilizes an, "innovative block with a new
material." Marshall Pruett furthers in the article that his
sources indicate the block will be made out of carbon fiber. Now,
at first this seems all a bit too dreamy, and frankly my first thought
was, "Bullshit." But a bit of digging and I've stumbled across,
and more importantly had it confirmed, that none other than Matti
Holtzberg, the guy behind Polimotor (more on that in a minute) is
indeed developing a MZR-R based carbon fiber engine block in parallel
to Elan's work on their aluminum billet engine. The engine will
use Holtzberg's casting technology with Elan's block design. And
the implications are simple: less weight. What must be
significantly less.
So who is Matti Hotlzberg? Holtzberg
was the guy who put a second mortage on his house to purchase a Lola
T-616 and showed up at Watkins Glen in 1984 with a Ford Pinto based,
2.0L, 4-cylinder plastic
engine stuck in back of it. No, this wasn't some backyard science
project; Holtzberg had persistently designed and developed a plastic
engine that weighed only 160 lbs. With the backing of Amoco Chemicals it was then decided to enter the IMSA Camel Lights series to showcase the material (Torlon) and engine, hence Watkins Glen. In the end the idea was to simply show that the concept worked,
not to win races (their best finish was 11th at Lime Rock in 1985).
And while the car suffered numerous unrelated reliability issues,
only once did the engine let them down.
Now, why my excitement
and interest in this and not DeltaWing? Simple, this has real
applications and the designed-by-Rube Goldberg DeltaWing does not.
DeltaWing is car design that picks and chooses which rules to
follow and which not to, and shows us that free/open regulations allow,
imagine that, efficient designs. Scott Tucker's DSR shows the
same thing too (and weighs 1000 lbs with roughly 300 hp), though it has
four wheels. But this, this is a material application. And
as long as there isn't some hidden cost (the concepts in Polimotor were
simply too expensive to execute for mass production), there could be
potential usage for mass produced road cars. The engine is, after
all, a pretty significant source of weight. And the benefits to
fuel MPG are pretty good if you can take weight out. Ultimately
you can only go so far in taking weight out of bodywork and
non-structural panels (that's about the extent of CF usage in mass
produced road cars). But if you can begin to attack the other sources
of weight...
| |  1.20.13
>>Endurance-info.com
captured these shots of a version of the 2013 Audi R18 testing at the
Yas Marina circuit in Abu Dhabi. It should be no surprise at all
seeing an Audi interpretation of the elevated Toyota "wheel arch",
pardon me, I mean downforce producing add-on winglets. I'm told
these have been in development since the middle of last season.
This is an extruded section element (not a true wing with an
"infinite" trailing edge) and from some angles appears to have a gurney
on the trailing edge.
Detail tweaks pointed out in the images below.
|  Not
seen since the debut of the R18 in 2011 (and quickly superceeded), it
would appear that the slotted front covering panel is back (1). |  | Comparing
with the image below, note that the inboard fender shape is square now
(1). This is one of the larger visual changes. And from
this angle the right hand blister (2) appears to be a lot larger,
though Audi insiders say it is only "slightly" bigger than last year.
Note also that the outboard winglet add-on endplates are angled
towards the centerline (3). Toyota's behave similarly inasmuch as
they are 'S' curved in plan view. |  | Shanghai 2012. |
| | Detail
changes around the front wheel well exit. The most obvious is the
new vertical return just aft of the front wheel (1). But perhaps
the more significant modification is the enlargement of the front wheel
well exit (2). Speculation here is that with the increase in rear
downforce from the add-on winglets, the changes seen here at the front
help to rebalance the front/rear aero. |  | | Shanghai 2012. |  |
|
|
|
