We're still taking our time producing our Peugeot 908 page.  In the mean time Remi Humbert from gurneyflap.com sent us images taken at Barcelona a few weeks ago.  Looking through the images I was struck by this one in particular.  There's an awful lot of effort going in to making sure that no one gets a photo of the front end of the monocoque and subsequently making the mechanic's job all the more difficult.

Further running of the Dome S102 continued this past week at Fuji.  The testing included some night running as well as additional aero development.

The Dome S102 has finally taken to the track, shown here at Suzuka this past Monday and Tuesday.

Images courtesy Hidenori Suzuki

The comparative aero balance splits are interesting as well with 3541 units being generated at the front of the S101.5 (40% balance) and 4575 units for the S102 (45% balance).

Now Dome has admitted that during development of the S101.5 they discovered an issue with their wind tunnel that effected the data output and subsequently the S101.5 had less downforce and efficiency than initially thought.  Dome's Hiroshi Yuchi spoke with Race Car Engineering in '06 and had this to say on the subject:

"After S101 made it's debut at Le Mans in 2001, the correlation between the wind tunnel and track data has been very good and always very reliable.  However, when we started the LMP-H car development, we adjusted the parameters of the data analysis program for the hybrid, also to give a better result with CFD.  There was mistake on this parameter adjustment.  We found this problem after Le Mans last year. Therefore, most of the updates for this year are just to recover this problem."

So while we're a bit perplexed as to why Dome would release any actual aero figures, clearly they've sanitized them by either using a scaling factor known only to them or they are quoting an obscure force reference and we simply don't have the information.  But the need to quote data must be, in the end, simply be intended to show that the tunnel issues have been resolved.

Sebring round up...

>>Eco Racing Radical SR9 AER Diesel--I had a look at the chassis on Thursday and must admit this didn't appear to be a project ready for any track running, at least in my estimation.  The Touareg diesel engine installation in the Radical SR9 chassis (#s 004 and 006 according to Ian Dawson) has shifted the bellhousing/tranmission so far rearward within the Radical's existing wheelbase that the rear wheel/tire would certainly be rubbing up on the rear fender well should the car venture out on the track.  Additionally, as I looked at the car in the paddock the chassis A-frame was marginally threaded onto the bellhousing with but a nylock and there seemed to be a need for a spacer to prevent the bellhousing from shifting forward on the A-frame.  Though as Dawson mentioned, there were bellhousing issues and they had been attempting to have them sorted (machined) locally which explains the temporary nature of the bellhousing installation.   But to potentially compound the team's issues, for now at least, there is also a homologation issues with the monocoque in regards to it's crash test certification.

[bodywork] As viewed from the side, must cover the whole circumference of the complete wheels (wheels and tyres) above the axle centrelines level with no empty space or cut-out in the bodywork.

The inboard fender extension can be seen as the small (approximately 2.5" x 1.75") carbon add-on (riveted) just ahead of the valence panel.  Ultimately one wonders how anyone at Porsche had such a close look at the car to make a determination that the car was in violation, though I did witness Porsche's Michael Pfadenhauer oogling the Highcroft Acura as it sat stuck in a paddock traffic jam, presumably making sure the cars were finally in compliance.  Nick Wirth would only offer this, "I hope they are worried."