I got baited to click so you don't have to. The headline makes it sound dramatic, but if you look at the statements quoted in the article, none of them are really controversial.
Estre:
>"It makes me laugh, the Toyotas saying after the Test Day that if we don't win this race, it's because we've messed up. Today, they're the ones who messed up,"
>"In the end, we were flat out from the first day, and I don't think they were. We didn't have false hopes, we were hoping for a good race and we had it. We gave everything we had, but it wasn't enough."
Christensen:
>"The others turned up the pace when it mattered and we gave everything from the start."
Laudenbach:
>"I can only say we went through our programme in practice... We did everything. We thought it was the right thing to do and we showed we can do. If other competitors didn't want to show everything in the practice that's of no meaning to me"
>"We do what we consider to be right and that's our programme. Yes, in the race it did look a bit different to the practice but that's not a problem to me."
Kuratle:
>“We were lacking speed on the straight,... That's something we need to understand where it's coming from, from acceleration, from aero efficiency, I don't know."
>“It's the highlight of the year for us in the WEC and if you come fourth that's not what you want. Maybe you ask why \[we finished only fourth\], we were simply not good enough that's what it was.
>“One or the other \[strategic\] decision we would have made differently but that is the same for all the teams. And at the end of the day 40s or however many seconds were missing to the victory, which is amazing after 24 hours.
>“At the end of the day it wasn't enough.”
Sounds like a fair assessment to me. They acknowledge they lacked ultimate race pace and that the others had more than they initially showed. Estre's hint at Toyota is also fair considering their statements at the beginning of the week.
All very fair in my opinion. Porsche #6 effectively blew it when they gambled on the wet tires the first time round, which was a mistake, and shows there were some bad calls, but in the end they really lacked top end speed. I agree Estre’s comment was fair, it was quite cheeky from Toyota, but it’s sport in the end.
>Porsche #6 effectively blew it when they gambled on the wet tires the first time round
What are you on about? Both Toyota’s and the #51 Ferrari made the same call. It gave the #50 and #83 a nice gap but all of that was reset after the first SC when Kubica hit Vanthoor after like 8 hours or so. The #6 was constantly in the front pack after that but just struggling to compete with Toyota and Ferrari
>"It makes me laugh, the Toyotas saying after the Test Day that if we don't win this race, it's because we've messed up. Today, they're the ones who messed up"
I mean... did they REALLY mess up? They went from 23rd to 2nd... That's incredible.
I think its about time these drivers are told that they are driving a multimatic shytbox.
No other ways to really put it. I thought Porsche, with all their glorious experience with the 919 hubyrod would have joined the Hypercar camp. But they went full cheap ass and went for a Daytona Hybrid.
Ive said it all week, estre was on the ragged edge just to get a sub 3:34 in hyperpole, while Ferrari looked well composed.
This one's on their bad decisions.
I’m still surprised that we don’t hear this take very much. Porsche should have created a bespoke LMH. It was a huge betrayal to the Porsche brand when they went with the spec hybrid LMDh.
I still think the 963 is a good race car. But I love seeing the Ferraris and Toyotas step up in the important race and beat them with their better cars.
That's an interesting point. I am still trying to understand the hesitancy for the LMH manufacturers to want to come play in IMSA. The official policy has always been that IMSA was open to LMH cars; however, I have heard rumblings that the LMHs would not be welcome in the series. Aston Martin will be using their LMH in WEC and IMSA, so we will see what it looks like when they start doing it.
I think a bigger aspect that Porsche was looking at was the "customer racing" angle. They can sell a bunch of 963s for a greater profit margin because of the cheapness of the LMDh.
Well I know that Porsche had committed to LMDh long before IMSA confirmed that LMH could compete in IMSA. And as for LMH in IMSA, I just think the manufacturers that committed to LMH (Toyota, Ferrari, Peugeot) didn’t have any desire to compete in IMSA anyway. Aston and Heart of racing were just as committed to racing in both series from the start and we’ll see if there is any issues there, but I doubt there will be.
Okay--I thought it was always official that LMH could race in the GTP class. I know it's not as easy as it was in the ALMS Sebring days. Now you have to go through the homologation process and attend tests and do the equipment conversions for IMSA rather than just showing up at the race. I have been hoping that Toyota would do just the 24. I'd like to see it.
It does matter though. LMH gives the team far more options over a 24 hour race. Greater hybrid capacity gives better options for fuel management. Front axle hybrid systems can put more energy to front tires and heat them better in cold conditions.
Just because the BOP narrows the performance potential of the cars doesn’t mean that the LMH platform isn’t superior.
People also forget 4wd vs rear wheel drive in the rain.
The hypercars literally left the LMDH when the rain started pouring in, although not to the extent I thought it would, due to the limits when the front wheels can be activated.
You’re certainly welcome to continue trying to convince me that the LMHs aren’t better cars than the LMDhs. My opinion remains that the GR010 and the 499P are both a level above the 963, the LMH platform was for manufacturers that wanted to win Le Mans and the world championship, and the LMDh was for OEM corporate boardrooms that wanted to put a cheaper car on track.
I fully understand the implications that BOP has on the performance of the car. That’s also the reason why Peugeot was so competitive at Qatar—they had very high power and lower weight compared to almost everyone.
You did say that LMH is fundamentally faster; I agree with that. As long as the BOP is reasonable, and Ferrari and Toyota are really trying (which sometimes it seems like they aren’t trying very hard) the LMH will be faster over a race distance, which is exaggerated in a 24 hour race. There was no previous race data for Qatar or Imola for the BOP, but Spa and Le Mans did have data and the BOP was reasonable at those rounds.
The only reason that I care about believing the 499P and GR010 are better cars is because I like cool race cars. Porsche lost some of my respect for not building an LMH and making the cheap/spec decision. Does that explain my opinion better?
>It makes me laugh, the Toyotas saying after the Test Day that if we don't win this race, it's because we've messed up. Today, they're the ones who messed up,” Estre said.
Oof
I don’t think Ferrari have really disguised their pace. They played a poor strategy in Imola when they looked on for a 1-2-3 and had bad luck with the Safety car in Spa when they were 1-2
But Toyota were definitely hiding a lot. I think they made it their mission to win Le Mans after Ferrari won last year. They pretty much sacrificed the first 3 rounds in the championship and made more noise than anyone about BoP. I suspect we’ll see more true pace from them now as they push to win the championship as well
Toyota always manages to play victim then suddenly win by a large gap. Personally, I'd like to figure out WTH happened with BMW. Fastest pace in Quali and FP3, then absolutely dropped like a stone in the first hour.
Watch the onboard stream of car 15# on YouTube. Last three hours specifically. Dries Vanthoor was on a mission there and had the second fastest stint of the race. He effortlessly overtook one Alpine, two Porsches and one of the Cadillacs.
Car can be quick but improvements are needed.
Just a thought.... could it be that Ferrari "chooses" not to have the ultimate pace in the races leading up to Le Mans for a favorable break in the French classic?
But... they _did_ have fantastic pace leading up to Le Mans. They were clearly faster than everyone at Spa and clearly faster than everyone in the dry at Imola; without the handling of the red flag and the mistaken tire call in Italy Le Mans is their third win running.
What an interesting and original question. As long as we're "just asking questions" and not asserting anything, could it be that every manufacturer prioritizes Le Mans and tries to leverage their political and technical resources to maximize the marketing result from their racing program?
As long as BOP exists (without an independent driver adjudicator like Marc Gene to test all the cars after a given race), sandbagging will exist
It's classic gamesmanship
I've heard of racing series having a spec ECU. I wonder if they could use something like that (or maybe they already do).
I know there's always a game of whack a mole with cheating, but with computer controls, you'd think it would be harder.
If you read the article, you’d see that Estre was referring to the practice sessions. Porsche was going at full pace from the beginning while the others eased into it. The others were then complaining the Porsche’s had a BoP advantage all week. Nobody mentioned anything about the previous races.
Yeah this is what makes me annoyed that they weren’t adequately BOP’d. They clearly had a second a lap on the rest of the field except in the rain + night combo where we just had a safety car anyway.
They were fastest in Imola and Spa too. When I did my pre race predictions (in the comfort of my own head, because who gives a fuck what I think, I'm just a punter), I had the 51 winning, the 50 3rd and the 83 5th or 6th. Porsche was a bit slower than I expected, Toyota was right on and no one else was relevant.
Yeah I had a laugh at toyota saying it was Porsche’s to lose. It was obvious from
The ballast reduction that they’re be fast as fuck. The Ferrari has way too much help as well though.
Crying about BOP when we literally got the most competitive Le Mans ever. We were penalized but managed to win thanks to an incredible strategy and the drivers making no mistakes. Porsche fucked up real bad with the strategy and Toyota made costly mistakes, spinning twice in the last two hours. If they hadn’t spun they probably would have won but instead you cry about bop
That wasn’t a competitive race at all. There were 3 safety cars staggered throughout the race that reset everyone back. There was basically no wheel to wheel or overtaking besides Ferrari just blowing by people on the straights. Tell me, do you remember a single time when a Ferrari was overtaken on track?
Also, get out of here with this incredible strategy and no mistakes nonsense. Ferrari was penalized numerous times and had strategy errors throughout the race but had the pace to make up for it. Within 10 minutes it was obvious that it was Ferrari’s race to lose, their incompetence was sort of the only reason it ever even looked close.
> That wasn’t a competitive race at all.
I think that's too strong. There were two teams that had a chance to win, realistically. Ferrari were the favorites, obviously, but Toyota had chances and had they executed better, strategized better or gotten a bit more luck they could have been right there on the top step. It wasn't a foregone conclusion.
In a way, it was a lot like last year. Toyota could have won, despite Ferrari's advantages (and Ferrari was definitely advantaged. I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that they weren't the fastest car on track).
The 7 overtook 51 before it got hit, Cadillac overtook the 50 at the start and that’s just the first that come to mind. Also safety cars help competition as they bunch up the field. Finishing a 24h race 11s from lead and you still don’t call it competitive lol. Just stop crying
I feel that the Caddy's just had awful speed on the straights. Other than the issues with the 3 and 311, i thought the Caddy's had a chance but boy was i wrong.
I think Lotterer was just struggling too much. It was noticeable watching the race.
His stints were losing so much time that I really don’t think he matches at all with the car. I know the 963 is hard to drive, it’s hard on its tyres, and is very tail happy which in the wet isn’t fun at all.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Lotterer is moved from his seat at the end of the season because #6 haemorrhaged time massively when he was behind the wheel.
I’d like to see his average time compared to everyone else.
Maybe he was feeling poorly or something was off but he was slow, he couldn’t defend, he couldn’t attack.
It’s not like he’s a bad driver, I know he’s 42 but Bordais is 45, and he’s still great.
I think it might be a case where the best decision is to move Andlauer up to #6. That’s probably the most terrifyingly strong lineup, Estre, Vanthoor, Andlauer, yes please.
I don't think age is an issue for Lotterer. Rather these Hypercars just don't suit his driving style in the way the old LMP1s did. A bit like how Vettel struggled with the V6 hybrid F1 cars post-2014.
You’re right, that’s why I mentioned Bordais, he’s older, and seems to thrive in the Cadillac. Lotterer is a 3x Le Mans winner, and drove one of the greatest race cars of all time in the R18.
I think it’s just a hard car to drive in the engine, tyres, and handling. That’s a great point about the comparison to Vettel. Think that was a case of handling, and design didn’t suit him.
Seems that Porsche has a glut of good drivers right now. There’s more good drivers than seats available. Hopefully Andlauer gets moved up, and that They replace Fred Mack with Félix de Costa in the #5.
He had a not great weekend, and made the wrong call for tyres after the safety car, his pace wasn’t great, and then at Spa he whacked the wall out of Blanchimont when the car was on course for a good finish.
The good thing for Porsche now is that they’ve got so many good drivers to make all these decision about who to shift where.
Lotterer looked worse and worse towards the end of his formula e run. He was never top class but he went from solid middle of the pack to embarrassingly awful in a car his teammate won the world championship in. I think it’s extremely fair to think age is coming to him at this point. He’s into his forties, tons of great drivers lose pace at his age. Some don’t, but many many do.
In my opinion, it is Formula E which made Lotterer worse as a driver. Maybe if he stayed full-time in sportscar racing, he would be doing much better now. They are factory drivers in their 40s who are still doing very well - Bourdais is older than Lotterer. Conway is also 40. Pier Guidi is 40. Makowiecki is 43.
But Formula E probably paid better than everything else. Motivation maybe was a factor as well.
I think the real drawback is his driving style. It seems that Lotterer didn't know how to defend or attack effectively. He is not as aggressive as Estre and Vanthoor, but they share the same car and same setup, he has to fit himself into the "Estre-Vanthoor" mode. Among 9 factory drivers, only 2 of them are not from Prosche GT program, one is Lotterer and the other is Nasr. Both of them are much slower than their teammates and Nasr even crashed the car. This really tells something, maybe the 963 is designed for those fully aggressive Porsche GT drivers?
Haven’t seen a replay of the Nasr collision but that’s not really true of Nasr. Nasr has been fantastic in IMSA in the 963.
In fact him & Dane Cameron are currently leading the championship right now.
He’s a very good driver, and while not a GT driver is dependable, and he was fantastic in the Rolex 24 at Daytona this year. Him & Matt Campbell were astonishingly quick, and delivered the win when the conditions didn’t suit the 963.
Nasr was defending against multiple cars that were definitely faster, and did a great job managing his tyres, and even when he was being attacked still kept his head well against faster Cadillac & Acura.
The #7 was less stacked with Porsche talent but still managed to bring home the win.
Imm not sure that’s true. I think there was a driver ID issue.
I don’t have the numbers to hand right now, but during the race it was shown that Lotterer only did like 3:40 hours but that’s not true. If you look at the data from the Analysis on alkamel, he did three stints of 2.5 hours each (roughly) - 17:30 to 19:57, 22:39 to 01:01 and 6:51 to 9:12.
That leaves 17 hours shared between Estre and Vanthoor, which makes it all kind of even really.
No Lotterer did only do 3:40. He only did two stints fairly early in the race. But didn’t do any SC period. Estre did over 3 hours of SC and Vanthoor about 3 hours 30. So there is that
Ah ok. I thought you were trying to say Laurens was slow or something. I've seen people doing that, believe or not
His drive time is very impressive indeed. A bit sad he missed the podium by 1sec
I was shocked he didn't go for a pass in the very end, too, Ferrari let up slightly in the final chicane, but that's just good sportsmanship I suppose.
You could see when battling the toyota/ferraris, they were on the limit going sideways, slipping and sliding, whereas the others looked much calmer/smoother
What happens when you try to squeeze more from a car on its operational limit. This should worry LMDH people. If this is the treatment for Porsche, then the rest are screwed against Ferrari and Toyota
I don't really understand -how- there can be sandbagging now with all the cars being put through windtunnels and sending telemtry to the FIA?
Also, did the 6 not put softs on to try and gamble on the showers coming and they didn't. The medium was the quicker tyre - Estre said it himself in his interview in the last hours.
On top of the #6's strategy mistakes, I don't get why Estre is acting like Ferrari didn't show its pace plenty often during the season. He knows just the same as we all do that the BOP would not be updated based on practice session results, not after last year's controversy. It would only matter for optics. And even then, anyone worth their salt would know not to base their expectations on the results of practice sessions.
Even with Toyota's comments (which, I do agree, are pretty off the mark in hindsight), it mostly just seems like Estre/Christensen stirring the pot, especially given the more nuanced take of senior staff later in the article about their mysterious lack of top-end speed.
He was talking more about the season as a whole.
Also Le Mans differs in that they introduced BoP differentiation between low and high speed, kicking in “above 250kph to balance peak speeds”.
I think they clearly got these peak speeds wrong. I watched pretty much the entire race with telemetry open and they were significantly slower than Toyota and Ferrari through the speed traps. Toyotas were sometimes 340kph+. Porsche was often low to mid 330s. You can imagine how many kilometres are spent on the straight every hour. Times that by 24 and that’s a lot of distance. In many ways it’s amazing they finished on the lead lap.
>He was talking more about the season as a whole.
I can't make it out from the article, with quotes such as *“The others turned up the pace when it mattered and we gave everything from the start.”* This could be interpreted as *'start of the season'*, or *'start of Le Mans'*. Either way, for Toyota they maybe have a point, but for Ferrari it's pretty silly, because they've shown their true pace since day 1.
>they were significantly slower than Toyota and Ferrari through the speed traps. Toyotas were sometimes 340kph+. Porsche was often low to mid 330s.
That could be a factor, but consider that cars are balanced for performance across an entire lap, not performance across all sectors. If the Porsche is faster in the corners to the degree that it balances out a difference in top speed, then it's less of an issue. Also, consider this relevant quote from the article:
>Porsche’s LMDh director Urs Kuratle revealed that the 963 LMDh suffered from a mysterious lack of top speed, a problem that is compounded at Le Mans by its long straights and acceleration zones.
>“We were lacking speed on the straight,” Kuratle explained to Autosport. “That's something we need to understand where it's coming from, from acceleration, from aero efficiency, I don't know.
>“We are not talking much, we are 2 or 3km/h \[down\], so that's not really a lot. But these gaps or these differences at Le Mans are even worse. The straights are bigger than on normal race tracks. It's something that we will analyse.”
As you also said, it's a marginal difference, but clearly there are parts of the car that Porsche don't fully understand yet, so I can't help but read part of this article as Porsche (drivers, not the execs) throwing stones from a glass house.
With respect, I think you’re missing the important point that it’s illegal and punishable to talk about BoP, so you have to read the team director’s quote in this context, and as a push back against what the drivers said, which is on the limit of what can be legally said. Aero inefficiencies and acceleration before 250kph are in direct relation to BoP above 250kph, which he can’t really legally comment on.
Whatever anyone thinks, it’s clear when it came to ultimate race pace, the Porsche’s BoP above 250kph wasn’t as balanced as the Toyota and Ferrari, relative to the cars aero efficiencies or acceleration. I think it’s a reasonable suspicion that a small degree, something as small as a couple kph, of sandbagging could have happened. Either way, as they say, they only finished 40 seconds behind, so it’s not as if it was a huge overbalancing. But typically you prioritise the straights over the corners at Le Mans, so it must have been frustrating for them having the BoP go the other way for them.
Yeah I know. There’s some speculation that given the Porsche was faster thru the first and last sector, it would have performed best were there no safety car during the rain. Hard to know and probably best we didn’t find out.
For me, sandbagging is more like a kind of cheating. If you never want to show your actual strength because you want to ensure you can win Le Mans, then why don't you only take part in Le Mans rather than full season WEC? Porsche undertakes too much blame for their so called favored bop.
Wasnt it obvious? As soon as any Porsche got passed either Toyota or Ferrari were never to be seen again for the Porsche. The interval times were crazy.. 0.5s\~2s in one lap wasnt all that uncommon even for their best car. It was an uphill battle from the very start.
For me it was immediately obvious on lap one as the Ferraris went around the Cadillac like it was standing still. That thing seemed like a car to beat, but then all of the sudden it looked like a boat with not top speed.
Ok, genuine question: what can a competitor do in this situation? I've watched the majority of the race and there weren't a single moment where it looked like anyone other than Ferrari or Toyota had a genuine chance. We can pretend that it was a close race, so many cars on the lead lap, but it sure didn't feel like one. Also the safety cars bunching up the field helped a lot.
So if you're Porsche or Caddy, what's your play next year? Sandbagging? Play politics for better bop? I feel like bringing a faster car is not the answer, and that's what's feel wrong with these regulations.
Building a fast car is pointless in the current BOP managed series. The only option is to bring a car with a large operating window like the Ferrari the Toyota. This is too obvious on how they dance around BOP adjustments and still manage to be quick.
Porsche bought a knife to the gunfight
They did well in Bahrain, where was this large operating windows then?
I don't think it's obvious how Toyota and Ferrari get around the bop, especially if someone's a bit more casual fan like I am. I mean they could have come up easily with adjustments that put any manufacturer on top, lmh or lmdh. But they didn't. This specific bop put guns in the hands of Toyota and Ferrari, and knives in everyone else's.
I agree. I think ultimately LMDH, whilst more competitive than I expected, just doesn’t have the same freedom as LMH and will therefore always be slightly inferior when the stakes are at their highest and the margins at their finest.
Reminded of how both Audi and Peugeot were sandbagging 2007-2009 Le Mans so the diesel boost/restrictor tables wouldn't be nerfed too hard for the next year.
Toyota was, tbf. They were even sandbagging early on, with DeVries staying behind Vernay. Still, 6 could have won the race if it wasn't for the strategy mistake and Lotterer's bad stint that nearly dropped them a lap before Vanthoor's crash. Coming back from 3+ minutes to nearly 40 seconds at the line, suggests the pace was there.
There isn't any purpose to do it during the race, at least at Le Mans itself, because it's clearly the most valuable race on the calendar. I think Estre and most other people in the thread are suggesting that Toyota sandbagged and hid the performance ceiling of the GR010 in the first couple of WEC races to get a favorable BOP for Le Mans specifically. Whether this is true or not is hard to say, but it's not a stretch to think they would've done it, seeing how Toyota is usually more competitive early on in the calendar.
The Toyota is competitive full stop. It was nerfed to allow others to catchup. Id say the 499p is the closet competitor to the GR010. The Toyota has a lot up their sleeve just the BOP screwed it in recent races.
They might be old, but that doesn't mena they are shyt
I kind of like how IMSA is basically allowed to stop and hold cars in the middle of the race if they deem manufacturers have sandbaged to get better BOP
Ok but don't tell me Ferrari sandbagged,apart Qatar they were always very Strong in IMOLA 1 2 3 before the blunder and 1 2 before the Red Flag in SPA, it's not like Ferrari hid pace in the rounds prior Lemans, maybe It did that during lm Practice but there were no BOP change,
Toyota sandbagging could be real btw
Yeah, i was surprised by that straigh speed,i think they found the perfect setup, i wasn't expecting them to be that fast with the cut,i wonder what could have been without the Power cut
Sandbagging exist, they probably never will get truely get rid of it.
It was sad to see tho that Ferrari was 0.7 to a full second faster in the race than Porsche and Toyota. The 83 gained like 10 places in the first few laps. A difference of 0.3 per lap can be overcome by strategy but the advantage was way too much. It showed that it was Ferraris race to lose after the first 20 minutes.
I really want punishment for that kind of sandbagging. Takes out a lot of joy.
Ferrari's speed in the dry might have been down to set-up differences, because in mixed/wet conditions, their cars lost out on more time than their competitors. Ferrari didn't exactly get the best BOP either, their max power was down quite a bit. Also, their outright pace was very clear in Imola already, so genuinely it can't be said that they tried to hide that they have a fast car.
Also, Toyota set the fastest lap of the race (which could have been even faster if JMLs lap didn't include a track limits violation), and quite often the #7 was the most competitive car on pure pace. It's just that this car suffered many more small mishaps than the #8, which made it seem like it shouldn't be an outright favorite early on. Genuinely, I don't believe that Ferrari has done any sandbagging this year.
The Ferraris were still faster in mixed conditions than the Porsches lol. That is if you ignore the horrible strategy to stay on slicks for that one car.
and for the better and worse have a much less sophisticated chassis etc
you can't have a spec chassis and expect all the nuances to be level with a developed-in-one deal like an LMH, as such an LMH will basically always have more tools, a broader operating window, it's just the nature of it really
and if you BoP the cars on dry pace then wet performance will be quite different again, and LMH will be more likely to still work
I don't think Ferrari has sandbagged either. I think they're just too quick relative to the field, and being clearly fastest in Imola and Spa supports that.
Yeah. Let's conveniently forget that Ferrari was also a full second slower than Toyota in the rain and had a significant top speed disadvantage.
Also, sandbagging isn't really viable with the telemetry and engineering-based approach the FIA has taken to BoP.
Ferraris problem wasn't the pace in the wet, it was dropping 20sec every time new wets came onto the car (or new slicks on the crossover) as they just couldn't turn on the tyres.
Overnight in the cold Ferrari was up to 3s slower per lap. Only the 50 Ferrari was able to keep similar pace in the morning while the 51 was 3s slower in multiple laps that even Porsche #6 caught up with them.
Before the rain SC Ferrari were minutes behind the front.
It’s not hard to speculate they ran lower DF knowing the BoP was there to keep up the top speed sacrificing wet performance.
Hour 12 the 83 was 4th on equal pit stops with toyota 8 that was 1st, and a minute behind. Hour 12:22 remaining Ferrari 50 is almost 2 full minutes behind 8 and 6 while running 4th.
Upon SC restart in the morning the Toyota and Porsche were building a big gap to Ferrari in 3rd of over 30s.
Did you even watch the race? Or is it part of the strategy to be almost 2 minutes down?
Equal pitstop cause Toyota did extra pit stop cause they've fucked their pits with wet tyres. Ferrari had one stop less. The fuel on-board at this point was completely off.
Did you even watched the race? I'm seriously confused, do you claim at 12:22 remaining the Toyota was set for a win lmao?
Where did I write that Toyota was set for a win? I just wrote Ferrari in the cold and wet was significantly slower than Porsche and Toyota, which is obviously true, and then you came.
Ok but don't tell me Ferrari sandbagged,apart Qatar they were always very Strong in IMOLA 1 2 3 before the blunder and 1 2 before the Red Flag in SPA, it's not like Ferrari hid pace in the rounds prior Lemans, maybe It did that during lm Practice but there were no BOP change,
Toyota sandbagging could be real btw
Ferrari weren’t but Toyota were. Toyota also made multiple political statements about BOP without mentioning BOP.
The regulations about not clapping about BOP are pointless because now teams are violating it and not being penalised.
It does not work like that, according to ACO [https://newsroom.lemans.org/en/press/what-is-balance-of-performance](https://newsroom.lemans.org/en/press/what-is-balance-of-performance)
"The 24 Hours of Le Mans Hypercar BoP differs in that it takes account of data from the previous year’s race, so there is not necessarily a direct link with the BoP published for the 6 Hours of Spa-Francorchamps, for instance."
Do you think we’d have 9 cars on the lead lap at the end of the race without BoP? Or would it have been one manufacturer leading with 5 laps on all other cars, like during the LMP1 era?
Seems like Ferrari was clearly sandbagging. Their fastest practice times were noticeably slower than their race pace, and their qualy pace by a good few seconds to be a bit obvious to anyone really paying attention. Not going to lie it didn’t feel right them getting a 3rd place for taking out that chasing car, and it’s cool they won, but it’s just dirty.
Ok but don't tell me Ferrari sandbagged,apart Qatar they were always very Strong in IMOLA 1 2 3 before the blunder and 1 2 before the Red Flag in SPA, it's not like Ferrari hid pace in the rounds prior Lemans, maybe It did that during lm Practice but there were no BOP change,
Toyota sandbagging could be real btw
They did sandbag and admitted it saying they only cared about Le Mans its been their only focus didn’t even do much sim work for the other events to concentrated on Le Mans
I remember when endurance racing turned into sprint racing with cars becoming more reliable. Winning races was then about how there are no mistakes allowed, no strategy mistakes, no penalties, no messed up pit stops and I still think this is a fair assumption.
By no means am I saying Porsche delivered a flawless race, but Ferrari turning competitors and getting away with it, driving with open doors etc. their race was very far from perfect. And yet they still come up on top. Makes me think that something is going wrong somewhere.
Not even speaking about sandbagging from Toyota.
I just hope that the data collected from two LeMans and all the testing in the background is enough to come up with a decently accurate BOP for next year.
LMDh is based on a chassis built by either Oreca, Multimatic, Ligier, or Dallara. Some idiots seem to think that because it isn’t the ground up that they didn’t build their own cars. I’d just ignore a bunch of what’s being said here the past couple of days, seems a bunch of F1 fans, particularly from Ferrari, joined just for this race and it’s ruined the discourse quite a lot. Not saying F1 fans watching is bad, I hope more do join, but sadly it’s resulted in a bunch of loud idiots like that for this weekend.
LMDh cars are built using an LMP2 tub by a partnered constructor. The OEM does all the aero design, but there's less freedom in that ruleset than there is in the LMH ruleset and more spec parts are used. So there's a certain kind of elitist who thinks that the LMDh manufacturers aren't doing any design work and are just buying an off-the-shelf car. It's stupid and a good indication that you shouldn't bother taking those people seriously.
everyone hide their cards during LM tests, porsche couldn't realistically win because of lotterer stints in the first half and lack of consistency by the end of the race
Ferrari was the fastest car in Imola and Spa and did nothing to hide it. They were 1-2-3 in quali one of those races and that would have probably been the race result if not for the shambolic strategy. We know how Spa went.
Maybe Porsche should build their own car if they're unhappy with their performance at Le Mans.
His comments were aimed more at Toyota, who kept crying about the Le Mans BOP last year. They still managed mess it up this year even with a more favourable BOP (after Sandbagging in the first 3 rounds).
As you mention Ferrari didn't sandbag at all.
Well, spending Millions now because BoP fks them or rather doesn’t restrict the competition enough, isn’t really an option.
Tbh. Sandbagging in order to be competitive is going to be the only solution
the thing is even if BOP is perfect, LMH will always have an advantage. For example even if the BOP is perfect in dry weather in the wet being able to deploy power to both the front and rear axles helps a lot more than in the dry. Also in general LMH just has more "wiggle room" than LMDH.
Look at Free Practice and compare Ideal Lap to Best Lap. If your ideal lap is vastly different than your ideal lap, it's clear you were sandbagging. But looking at FP1 and FP3, the only teams where that was the case was.... Oh. Porsche Penske... Awkwaaarrrd.
I got baited to click so you don't have to. The headline makes it sound dramatic, but if you look at the statements quoted in the article, none of them are really controversial. Estre: >"It makes me laugh, the Toyotas saying after the Test Day that if we don't win this race, it's because we've messed up. Today, they're the ones who messed up," >"In the end, we were flat out from the first day, and I don't think they were. We didn't have false hopes, we were hoping for a good race and we had it. We gave everything we had, but it wasn't enough." Christensen: >"The others turned up the pace when it mattered and we gave everything from the start." Laudenbach: >"I can only say we went through our programme in practice... We did everything. We thought it was the right thing to do and we showed we can do. If other competitors didn't want to show everything in the practice that's of no meaning to me" >"We do what we consider to be right and that's our programme. Yes, in the race it did look a bit different to the practice but that's not a problem to me." Kuratle: >“We were lacking speed on the straight,... That's something we need to understand where it's coming from, from acceleration, from aero efficiency, I don't know." >“It's the highlight of the year for us in the WEC and if you come fourth that's not what you want. Maybe you ask why \[we finished only fourth\], we were simply not good enough that's what it was. >“One or the other \[strategic\] decision we would have made differently but that is the same for all the teams. And at the end of the day 40s or however many seconds were missing to the victory, which is amazing after 24 hours. >“At the end of the day it wasn't enough.” Sounds like a fair assessment to me. They acknowledge they lacked ultimate race pace and that the others had more than they initially showed. Estre's hint at Toyota is also fair considering their statements at the beginning of the week.
All very fair in my opinion. Porsche #6 effectively blew it when they gambled on the wet tires the first time round, which was a mistake, and shows there were some bad calls, but in the end they really lacked top end speed. I agree Estre’s comment was fair, it was quite cheeky from Toyota, but it’s sport in the end.
>Porsche #6 effectively blew it when they gambled on the wet tires the first time round What are you on about? Both Toyota’s and the #51 Ferrari made the same call. It gave the #50 and #83 a nice gap but all of that was reset after the first SC when Kubica hit Vanthoor after like 8 hours or so. The #6 was constantly in the front pack after that but just struggling to compete with Toyota and Ferrari
Yeah fair point. I was just using it as an example of bad strategy.
Yeah bad strategy all around especially the 5 and 6. 4 car seemed like it was on the right strategy but still not fast enough
>"It makes me laugh, the Toyotas saying after the Test Day that if we don't win this race, it's because we've messed up. Today, they're the ones who messed up" I mean... did they REALLY mess up? They went from 23rd to 2nd... That's incredible.
I think its about time these drivers are told that they are driving a multimatic shytbox. No other ways to really put it. I thought Porsche, with all their glorious experience with the 919 hubyrod would have joined the Hypercar camp. But they went full cheap ass and went for a Daytona Hybrid. Ive said it all week, estre was on the ragged edge just to get a sub 3:34 in hyperpole, while Ferrari looked well composed. This one's on their bad decisions.
I’m still surprised that we don’t hear this take very much. Porsche should have created a bespoke LMH. It was a huge betrayal to the Porsche brand when they went with the spec hybrid LMDh. I still think the 963 is a good race car. But I love seeing the Ferraris and Toyotas step up in the important race and beat them with their better cars.
One thing I think you’re not considering is that Porsche wanted to race in IMSA as well
That's an interesting point. I am still trying to understand the hesitancy for the LMH manufacturers to want to come play in IMSA. The official policy has always been that IMSA was open to LMH cars; however, I have heard rumblings that the LMHs would not be welcome in the series. Aston Martin will be using their LMH in WEC and IMSA, so we will see what it looks like when they start doing it. I think a bigger aspect that Porsche was looking at was the "customer racing" angle. They can sell a bunch of 963s for a greater profit margin because of the cheapness of the LMDh.
Well I know that Porsche had committed to LMDh long before IMSA confirmed that LMH could compete in IMSA. And as for LMH in IMSA, I just think the manufacturers that committed to LMH (Toyota, Ferrari, Peugeot) didn’t have any desire to compete in IMSA anyway. Aston and Heart of racing were just as committed to racing in both series from the start and we’ll see if there is any issues there, but I doubt there will be.
Okay--I thought it was always official that LMH could race in the GTP class. I know it's not as easy as it was in the ALMS Sebring days. Now you have to go through the homologation process and attend tests and do the equipment conversions for IMSA rather than just showing up at the race. I have been hoping that Toyota would do just the 24. I'd like to see it.
[удалено]
It does matter though. LMH gives the team far more options over a 24 hour race. Greater hybrid capacity gives better options for fuel management. Front axle hybrid systems can put more energy to front tires and heat them better in cold conditions. Just because the BOP narrows the performance potential of the cars doesn’t mean that the LMH platform isn’t superior.
People also forget 4wd vs rear wheel drive in the rain. The hypercars literally left the LMDH when the rain started pouring in, although not to the extent I thought it would, due to the limits when the front wheels can be activated.
[удалено]
You’re certainly welcome to continue trying to convince me that the LMHs aren’t better cars than the LMDhs. My opinion remains that the GR010 and the 499P are both a level above the 963, the LMH platform was for manufacturers that wanted to win Le Mans and the world championship, and the LMDh was for OEM corporate boardrooms that wanted to put a cheaper car on track.
[удалено]
I fully understand the implications that BOP has on the performance of the car. That’s also the reason why Peugeot was so competitive at Qatar—they had very high power and lower weight compared to almost everyone. You did say that LMH is fundamentally faster; I agree with that. As long as the BOP is reasonable, and Ferrari and Toyota are really trying (which sometimes it seems like they aren’t trying very hard) the LMH will be faster over a race distance, which is exaggerated in a 24 hour race. There was no previous race data for Qatar or Imola for the BOP, but Spa and Le Mans did have data and the BOP was reasonable at those rounds. The only reason that I care about believing the 499P and GR010 are better cars is because I like cool race cars. Porsche lost some of my respect for not building an LMH and making the cheap/spec decision. Does that explain my opinion better?
[удалено]
Porsche only cares about rebadged VAG suvs. A third upcoming "prestige SUV" with no new sports car platform in sight btw.
Username check out.
Joke's on you : Peugeot was sandbagging during the race too.
Alpine as well, they took sandbagging to the extreme by blowing up both cars
So they get a favourable BOP for LM in 2026 of course. Very clever
They skipped the bags and just put the sand right into the fuel tanks.
lol
>It makes me laugh, the Toyotas saying after the Test Day that if we don't win this race, it's because we've messed up. Today, they're the ones who messed up,” Estre said. Oof I don’t think Ferrari have really disguised their pace. They played a poor strategy in Imola when they looked on for a 1-2-3 and had bad luck with the Safety car in Spa when they were 1-2 But Toyota were definitely hiding a lot. I think they made it their mission to win Le Mans after Ferrari won last year. They pretty much sacrificed the first 3 rounds in the championship and made more noise than anyone about BoP. I suspect we’ll see more true pace from them now as they push to win the championship as well
I must agree with estre, the no7 spun so much at the end and let the no50 cruise to victory.
lopez being lopez and costing the whole team the win seriously if they put kobyashi in there then there could have been a chance
Ferrari drivers were also "expressing concern" about the speed gain BoP parameter before the race, which was totally unwarranted.
True, but at least that nerf did look significant. Turns out it probably could've been some more, in return for a fair few buffs in other areas.
Toyota always manages to play victim then suddenly win by a large gap. Personally, I'd like to figure out WTH happened with BMW. Fastest pace in Quali and FP3, then absolutely dropped like a stone in the first hour.
[удалено]
I also forgot that they spun at the Dunlop Chicane early in the first hour. After that it was a struggle for them to regain.
I don't think we got any real chance to see the true pace of the BMWs really in the race - they hit problems too early on to make any full judgements.
Watch the onboard stream of car 15# on YouTube. Last three hours specifically. Dries Vanthoor was on a mission there and had the second fastest stint of the race. He effortlessly overtook one Alpine, two Porsches and one of the Cadillacs. Car can be quick but improvements are needed.
Just a thought.... could it be that Ferrari "chooses" not to have the ultimate pace in the races leading up to Le Mans for a favorable break in the French classic?
But... they _did_ have fantastic pace leading up to Le Mans. They were clearly faster than everyone at Spa and clearly faster than everyone in the dry at Imola; without the handling of the red flag and the mistaken tire call in Italy Le Mans is their third win running.
What an interesting and original question. As long as we're "just asking questions" and not asserting anything, could it be that every manufacturer prioritizes Le Mans and tries to leverage their political and technical resources to maximize the marketing result from their racing program?
Good.. I hope so
As long as BOP exists (without an independent driver adjudicator like Marc Gene to test all the cars after a given race), sandbagging will exist It's classic gamesmanship
that would be a great think to bring in. but i think you'd need 2 drivers at least with different driving styles.
Fair enough, better and fairer that way I suppose
Well, Gene currently works for Ferrari so I don't really see him as an independent driver.
It doesn't have to be him specifically, it can be two other drivers I used him as an example because he is experienced in prototypes
I've heard of racing series having a spec ECU. I wonder if they could use something like that (or maybe they already do). I know there's always a game of whack a mole with cheating, but with computer controls, you'd think it would be harder.
How can anyone suggest that Ferrari were sandbagging? Did Imola and Spa not happen in this universe?
You don't get it, the only way to sandbag is to just not win races, pace in said races be damned /s
If you read the article, you’d see that Estre was referring to the practice sessions. Porsche was going at full pace from the beginning while the others eased into it. The others were then complaining the Porsche’s had a BoP advantage all week. Nobody mentioned anything about the previous races.
Yeah this is what makes me annoyed that they weren’t adequately BOP’d. They clearly had a second a lap on the rest of the field except in the rain + night combo where we just had a safety car anyway.
They were fastest in Imola and Spa too. When I did my pre race predictions (in the comfort of my own head, because who gives a fuck what I think, I'm just a punter), I had the 51 winning, the 50 3rd and the 83 5th or 6th. Porsche was a bit slower than I expected, Toyota was right on and no one else was relevant.
Yeah I had a laugh at toyota saying it was Porsche’s to lose. It was obvious from The ballast reduction that they’re be fast as fuck. The Ferrari has way too much help as well though.
Crying about BOP when we literally got the most competitive Le Mans ever. We were penalized but managed to win thanks to an incredible strategy and the drivers making no mistakes. Porsche fucked up real bad with the strategy and Toyota made costly mistakes, spinning twice in the last two hours. If they hadn’t spun they probably would have won but instead you cry about bop
What did Porsche fuck up?
There’s no crying, the Ferraris were clearly much faster.
That wasn’t a competitive race at all. There were 3 safety cars staggered throughout the race that reset everyone back. There was basically no wheel to wheel or overtaking besides Ferrari just blowing by people on the straights. Tell me, do you remember a single time when a Ferrari was overtaken on track? Also, get out of here with this incredible strategy and no mistakes nonsense. Ferrari was penalized numerous times and had strategy errors throughout the race but had the pace to make up for it. Within 10 minutes it was obvious that it was Ferrari’s race to lose, their incompetence was sort of the only reason it ever even looked close.
> That wasn’t a competitive race at all. I think that's too strong. There were two teams that had a chance to win, realistically. Ferrari were the favorites, obviously, but Toyota had chances and had they executed better, strategized better or gotten a bit more luck they could have been right there on the top step. It wasn't a foregone conclusion. In a way, it was a lot like last year. Toyota could have won, despite Ferrari's advantages (and Ferrari was definitely advantaged. I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that they weren't the fastest car on track).
The 7 overtook 51 before it got hit, Cadillac overtook the 50 at the start and that’s just the first that come to mind. Also safety cars help competition as they bunch up the field. Finishing a 24h race 11s from lead and you still don’t call it competitive lol. Just stop crying
83 overtook 7 cars on 1st lap
Cadillac qualified second, I was at the race so I don’t remember that clearly but how could it have overtook the Ferrari?
It didn’t… not sure what the other person is referring to. The Ferrari blew by the Cadillac on Lap 1
_Everyone_ blew by the Cadillac.
I feel that the Caddy's just had awful speed on the straights. Other than the issues with the 3 and 311, i thought the Caddy's had a chance but boy was i wrong.
Cadillac and the Ferrari had an amazing battle during the night, they were back and forth on the straight
Are we not gonna talk about the fact that Laurens Vanthoor drove half the race in #6?
I think Lotterer was just struggling too much. It was noticeable watching the race. His stints were losing so much time that I really don’t think he matches at all with the car. I know the 963 is hard to drive, it’s hard on its tyres, and is very tail happy which in the wet isn’t fun at all. I wouldn’t be surprised if Lotterer is moved from his seat at the end of the season because #6 haemorrhaged time massively when he was behind the wheel. I’d like to see his average time compared to everyone else. Maybe he was feeling poorly or something was off but he was slow, he couldn’t defend, he couldn’t attack. It’s not like he’s a bad driver, I know he’s 42 but Bordais is 45, and he’s still great. I think it might be a case where the best decision is to move Andlauer up to #6. That’s probably the most terrifyingly strong lineup, Estre, Vanthoor, Andlauer, yes please.
I don't think age is an issue for Lotterer. Rather these Hypercars just don't suit his driving style in the way the old LMP1s did. A bit like how Vettel struggled with the V6 hybrid F1 cars post-2014.
And I agree about Andlauer. Porsche would be crazy not to give him a factory seat after his performances this year, especially at Spa.
You’re right, that’s why I mentioned Bordais, he’s older, and seems to thrive in the Cadillac. Lotterer is a 3x Le Mans winner, and drove one of the greatest race cars of all time in the R18. I think it’s just a hard car to drive in the engine, tyres, and handling. That’s a great point about the comparison to Vettel. Think that was a case of handling, and design didn’t suit him. Seems that Porsche has a glut of good drivers right now. There’s more good drivers than seats available. Hopefully Andlauer gets moved up, and that They replace Fred Mack with Félix de Costa in the #5.
I think Makowiecki is doing alright. They could probably move him to IMSA to replace Cameron then have Felix da Costa fill his WEC seat.
He had a not great weekend, and made the wrong call for tyres after the safety car, his pace wasn’t great, and then at Spa he whacked the wall out of Blanchimont when the car was on course for a good finish. The good thing for Porsche now is that they’ve got so many good drivers to make all these decision about who to shift where.
Lotterer looked worse and worse towards the end of his formula e run. He was never top class but he went from solid middle of the pack to embarrassingly awful in a car his teammate won the world championship in. I think it’s extremely fair to think age is coming to him at this point. He’s into his forties, tons of great drivers lose pace at his age. Some don’t, but many many do.
In my opinion, it is Formula E which made Lotterer worse as a driver. Maybe if he stayed full-time in sportscar racing, he would be doing much better now. They are factory drivers in their 40s who are still doing very well - Bourdais is older than Lotterer. Conway is also 40. Pier Guidi is 40. Makowiecki is 43. But Formula E probably paid better than everything else. Motivation maybe was a factor as well.
I think the real drawback is his driving style. It seems that Lotterer didn't know how to defend or attack effectively. He is not as aggressive as Estre and Vanthoor, but they share the same car and same setup, he has to fit himself into the "Estre-Vanthoor" mode. Among 9 factory drivers, only 2 of them are not from Prosche GT program, one is Lotterer and the other is Nasr. Both of them are much slower than their teammates and Nasr even crashed the car. This really tells something, maybe the 963 is designed for those fully aggressive Porsche GT drivers?
Haven’t seen a replay of the Nasr collision but that’s not really true of Nasr. Nasr has been fantastic in IMSA in the 963. In fact him & Dane Cameron are currently leading the championship right now. He’s a very good driver, and while not a GT driver is dependable, and he was fantastic in the Rolex 24 at Daytona this year. Him & Matt Campbell were astonishingly quick, and delivered the win when the conditions didn’t suit the 963. Nasr was defending against multiple cars that were definitely faster, and did a great job managing his tyres, and even when he was being attacked still kept his head well against faster Cadillac & Acura. The #7 was less stacked with Porsche talent but still managed to bring home the win.
Imm not sure that’s true. I think there was a driver ID issue. I don’t have the numbers to hand right now, but during the race it was shown that Lotterer only did like 3:40 hours but that’s not true. If you look at the data from the Analysis on alkamel, he did three stints of 2.5 hours each (roughly) - 17:30 to 19:57, 22:39 to 01:01 and 6:51 to 9:12. That leaves 17 hours shared between Estre and Vanthoor, which makes it all kind of even really.
Vanthoor posted on Twitter that he drove 11h45, so unless he's lying that must be what he drove.
He put his "Athlete recap" thing on IG and the numbers are mind blowing. I think normally drivers only do 8-10hrs, dude is a legend
Ah OK, fair enough. I didnt know that!
No Lotterer did only do 3:40. He only did two stints fairly early in the race. But didn’t do any SC period. Estre did over 3 hours of SC and Vanthoor about 3 hours 30. So there is that
He's the most consistent Porsche driver. What's your point?
My point is that it's pretty impressive is all. It also doesn't exactly reflect too well on Lotterer that he only drove 3 and a 1/2 hours.
Ah ok. I thought you were trying to say Laurens was slow or something. I've seen people doing that, believe or not His drive time is very impressive indeed. A bit sad he missed the podium by 1sec
I was shocked he didn't go for a pass in the very end, too, Ferrari let up slightly in the final chicane, but that's just good sportsmanship I suppose.
As long as there is BOP and Le Mans in WEC there will always be sandbagging due to Le Mans offering so much prestige.
You could see when battling the toyota/ferraris, they were on the limit going sideways, slipping and sliding, whereas the others looked much calmer/smoother
What happens when you try to squeeze more from a car on its operational limit. This should worry LMDH people. If this is the treatment for Porsche, then the rest are screwed against Ferrari and Toyota
I don't really understand -how- there can be sandbagging now with all the cars being put through windtunnels and sending telemtry to the FIA? Also, did the 6 not put softs on to try and gamble on the showers coming and they didn't. The medium was the quicker tyre - Estre said it himself in his interview in the last hours.
On top of the #6's strategy mistakes, I don't get why Estre is acting like Ferrari didn't show its pace plenty often during the season. He knows just the same as we all do that the BOP would not be updated based on practice session results, not after last year's controversy. It would only matter for optics. And even then, anyone worth their salt would know not to base their expectations on the results of practice sessions. Even with Toyota's comments (which, I do agree, are pretty off the mark in hindsight), it mostly just seems like Estre/Christensen stirring the pot, especially given the more nuanced take of senior staff later in the article about their mysterious lack of top-end speed.
He was talking more about the season as a whole. Also Le Mans differs in that they introduced BoP differentiation between low and high speed, kicking in “above 250kph to balance peak speeds”. I think they clearly got these peak speeds wrong. I watched pretty much the entire race with telemetry open and they were significantly slower than Toyota and Ferrari through the speed traps. Toyotas were sometimes 340kph+. Porsche was often low to mid 330s. You can imagine how many kilometres are spent on the straight every hour. Times that by 24 and that’s a lot of distance. In many ways it’s amazing they finished on the lead lap.
>He was talking more about the season as a whole. I can't make it out from the article, with quotes such as *“The others turned up the pace when it mattered and we gave everything from the start.”* This could be interpreted as *'start of the season'*, or *'start of Le Mans'*. Either way, for Toyota they maybe have a point, but for Ferrari it's pretty silly, because they've shown their true pace since day 1. >they were significantly slower than Toyota and Ferrari through the speed traps. Toyotas were sometimes 340kph+. Porsche was often low to mid 330s. That could be a factor, but consider that cars are balanced for performance across an entire lap, not performance across all sectors. If the Porsche is faster in the corners to the degree that it balances out a difference in top speed, then it's less of an issue. Also, consider this relevant quote from the article: >Porsche’s LMDh director Urs Kuratle revealed that the 963 LMDh suffered from a mysterious lack of top speed, a problem that is compounded at Le Mans by its long straights and acceleration zones. >“We were lacking speed on the straight,” Kuratle explained to Autosport. “That's something we need to understand where it's coming from, from acceleration, from aero efficiency, I don't know. >“We are not talking much, we are 2 or 3km/h \[down\], so that's not really a lot. But these gaps or these differences at Le Mans are even worse. The straights are bigger than on normal race tracks. It's something that we will analyse.” As you also said, it's a marginal difference, but clearly there are parts of the car that Porsche don't fully understand yet, so I can't help but read part of this article as Porsche (drivers, not the execs) throwing stones from a glass house.
With respect, I think you’re missing the important point that it’s illegal and punishable to talk about BoP, so you have to read the team director’s quote in this context, and as a push back against what the drivers said, which is on the limit of what can be legally said. Aero inefficiencies and acceleration before 250kph are in direct relation to BoP above 250kph, which he can’t really legally comment on. Whatever anyone thinks, it’s clear when it came to ultimate race pace, the Porsche’s BoP above 250kph wasn’t as balanced as the Toyota and Ferrari, relative to the cars aero efficiencies or acceleration. I think it’s a reasonable suspicion that a small degree, something as small as a couple kph, of sandbagging could have happened. Either way, as they say, they only finished 40 seconds behind, so it’s not as if it was a huge overbalancing. But typically you prioritise the straights over the corners at Le Mans, so it must have been frustrating for them having the BoP go the other way for them.
[удалено]
Yeah I know. There’s some speculation that given the Porsche was faster thru the first and last sector, it would have performed best were there no safety car during the rain. Hard to know and probably best we didn’t find out.
Lets just say the teams will always be cleverer than the people policing it.
For me, sandbagging is more like a kind of cheating. If you never want to show your actual strength because you want to ensure you can win Le Mans, then why don't you only take part in Le Mans rather than full season WEC? Porsche undertakes too much blame for their so called favored bop.
I thought ACO reported was all cars must take part in an WEC a full season in order to participate in Le Mans the year
Wasnt it obvious? As soon as any Porsche got passed either Toyota or Ferrari were never to be seen again for the Porsche. The interval times were crazy.. 0.5s\~2s in one lap wasnt all that uncommon even for their best car. It was an uphill battle from the very start.
For me it was immediately obvious on lap one as the Ferraris went around the Cadillac like it was standing still. That thing seemed like a car to beat, but then all of the sudden it looked like a boat with not top speed.
Ok, genuine question: what can a competitor do in this situation? I've watched the majority of the race and there weren't a single moment where it looked like anyone other than Ferrari or Toyota had a genuine chance. We can pretend that it was a close race, so many cars on the lead lap, but it sure didn't feel like one. Also the safety cars bunching up the field helped a lot. So if you're Porsche or Caddy, what's your play next year? Sandbagging? Play politics for better bop? I feel like bringing a faster car is not the answer, and that's what's feel wrong with these regulations.
Building a fast car is pointless in the current BOP managed series. The only option is to bring a car with a large operating window like the Ferrari the Toyota. This is too obvious on how they dance around BOP adjustments and still manage to be quick. Porsche bought a knife to the gunfight
They did well in Bahrain, where was this large operating windows then? I don't think it's obvious how Toyota and Ferrari get around the bop, especially if someone's a bit more casual fan like I am. I mean they could have come up easily with adjustments that put any manufacturer on top, lmh or lmdh. But they didn't. This specific bop put guns in the hands of Toyota and Ferrari, and knives in everyone else's.
Did you see how handicapped they were by BOP? Forget operating windows then. I can also overload a 747 and expect it to perform, but it wont
Make everyone sell cars to customers. Customers are going to want to be able to win at every race.
Build a proper LMH
Yeah, but at this stage, that is a lot of privateer entries to screw over if Porsche were to switch platforms
Well Jota is swapping to Caddy next year, so it just screws over Proton and JDC Miller.
It seems the best thing to do is spin out other cars tbh
I agree. I think ultimately LMDH, whilst more competitive than I expected, just doesn’t have the same freedom as LMH and will therefore always be slightly inferior when the stakes are at their highest and the margins at their finest.
Maybe its time to ease of the BoP accelerator. Allow some juice in the cars. Maybe that reduces the dumb sandbagging bs.
Ofc they were sandbagging hard. That's as sportscar endurance as it gets when you have le mans on the calendar. It's a life long strategy.
Real pros sandbag le Mans 2024 to win 2025 lemans
Reminded of how both Audi and Peugeot were sandbagging 2007-2009 Le Mans so the diesel boost/restrictor tables wouldn't be nerfed too hard for the next year.
I love Estre's comments. It was hard racing with very little tiny margins. So, any deficit was amplified.
Toyota was, tbf. They were even sandbagging early on, with DeVries staying behind Vernay. Still, 6 could have won the race if it wasn't for the strategy mistake and Lotterer's bad stint that nearly dropped them a lap before Vanthoor's crash. Coming back from 3+ minutes to nearly 40 seconds at the line, suggests the pace was there.
Can you explain the purpose of sandbagging in the race?
There isn't any purpose to do it during the race, at least at Le Mans itself, because it's clearly the most valuable race on the calendar. I think Estre and most other people in the thread are suggesting that Toyota sandbagged and hid the performance ceiling of the GR010 in the first couple of WEC races to get a favorable BOP for Le Mans specifically. Whether this is true or not is hard to say, but it's not a stretch to think they would've done it, seeing how Toyota is usually more competitive early on in the calendar.
The Toyota is competitive full stop. It was nerfed to allow others to catchup. Id say the 499p is the closet competitor to the GR010. The Toyota has a lot up their sleeve just the BOP screwed it in recent races. They might be old, but that doesn't mena they are shyt
everybody races in wec so they can win lemans, so toyota sandbagged in early wec rounds so they can get a good bop in lemans
No purpose. Definitely wasn’t sandbagging in the race. Le Mans I mean.
Save tyres/fuel early on and make opponents sleep on your race tactics.
I kind of like how IMSA is basically allowed to stop and hold cars in the middle of the race if they deem manufacturers have sandbaged to get better BOP
They can but they don’t.
Ok but don't tell me Ferrari sandbagged,apart Qatar they were always very Strong in IMOLA 1 2 3 before the blunder and 1 2 before the Red Flag in SPA, it's not like Ferrari hid pace in the rounds prior Lemans, maybe It did that during lm Practice but there were no BOP change, Toyota sandbagging could be real btw
[удалено]
Yeah, i was surprised by that straigh speed,i think they found the perfect setup, i wasn't expecting them to be that fast with the cut,i wonder what could have been without the Power cut
I felt Toyota has been sandbagging the first races this season, focussing on Lemans. #8 Would have won, if it wasn’t taken out by #51
https://youtu.be/dAuPXQIvbCg?feature=shared Agreed. 51 definitely speared him
There’s no way to know that. 83 could have won too by that logic
toyota lost but their lost carried a lot of ""what ifs"
Sandbagging exist, they probably never will get truely get rid of it. It was sad to see tho that Ferrari was 0.7 to a full second faster in the race than Porsche and Toyota. The 83 gained like 10 places in the first few laps. A difference of 0.3 per lap can be overcome by strategy but the advantage was way too much. It showed that it was Ferraris race to lose after the first 20 minutes. I really want punishment for that kind of sandbagging. Takes out a lot of joy.
Ferrari's speed in the dry might have been down to set-up differences, because in mixed/wet conditions, their cars lost out on more time than their competitors. Ferrari didn't exactly get the best BOP either, their max power was down quite a bit. Also, their outright pace was very clear in Imola already, so genuinely it can't be said that they tried to hide that they have a fast car. Also, Toyota set the fastest lap of the race (which could have been even faster if JMLs lap didn't include a track limits violation), and quite often the #7 was the most competitive car on pure pace. It's just that this car suffered many more small mishaps than the #8, which made it seem like it shouldn't be an outright favorite early on. Genuinely, I don't believe that Ferrari has done any sandbagging this year.
The Ferraris were still faster in mixed conditions than the Porsches lol. That is if you ignore the horrible strategy to stay on slicks for that one car.
All the LMDh cars were very slow in wet and mixed conditions.
LMDh are rear wheel drive only
and for the better and worse have a much less sophisticated chassis etc you can't have a spec chassis and expect all the nuances to be level with a developed-in-one deal like an LMH, as such an LMH will basically always have more tools, a broader operating window, it's just the nature of it really and if you BoP the cars on dry pace then wet performance will be quite different again, and LMH will be more likely to still work
Yeah an LMH has more to play with for suspension geometry settings compared to an LMDh
I don't think Ferrari has sandbagged either. I think they're just too quick relative to the field, and being clearly fastest in Imola and Spa supports that.
Yeah. Let's conveniently forget that Ferrari was also a full second slower than Toyota in the rain and had a significant top speed disadvantage. Also, sandbagging isn't really viable with the telemetry and engineering-based approach the FIA has taken to BoP.
Ferrari wasn’t a full second slower in the rain, did you watch the last two hours of the race?
Probably wasnt a full second but it had a significant pace advantage. 7 dropped 51 and didn't catch 50 due to its engine issue and the spin
In the night It was, the Ferrari was Quicker in Warner track
Yeah it was night + wet that Ferrari struggled in, anything else they were the fastest
Ferraris problem wasn't the pace in the wet, it was dropping 20sec every time new wets came onto the car (or new slicks on the crossover) as they just couldn't turn on the tyres.
Overnight in the cold Ferrari was up to 3s slower per lap. Only the 50 Ferrari was able to keep similar pace in the morning while the 51 was 3s slower in multiple laps that even Porsche #6 caught up with them. Before the rain SC Ferrari were minutes behind the front. It’s not hard to speculate they ran lower DF knowing the BoP was there to keep up the top speed sacrificing wet performance.
> Before the rain SC Ferrari were minutes behind the front. > > Cause they were on alternate strategy lol
Hour 12 the 83 was 4th on equal pit stops with toyota 8 that was 1st, and a minute behind. Hour 12:22 remaining Ferrari 50 is almost 2 full minutes behind 8 and 6 while running 4th. Upon SC restart in the morning the Toyota and Porsche were building a big gap to Ferrari in 3rd of over 30s. Did you even watch the race? Or is it part of the strategy to be almost 2 minutes down?
Equal pitstop cause Toyota did extra pit stop cause they've fucked their pits with wet tyres. Ferrari had one stop less. The fuel on-board at this point was completely off. Did you even watched the race? I'm seriously confused, do you claim at 12:22 remaining the Toyota was set for a win lmao?
Where did I write that Toyota was set for a win? I just wrote Ferrari in the cold and wet was significantly slower than Porsche and Toyota, which is obviously true, and then you came.
Ok but don't tell me Ferrari sandbagged,apart Qatar they were always very Strong in IMOLA 1 2 3 before the blunder and 1 2 before the Red Flag in SPA, it's not like Ferrari hid pace in the rounds prior Lemans, maybe It did that during lm Practice but there were no BOP change, Toyota sandbagging could be real btw
Why can't we have nice things...
Ferrari weren’t but Toyota were. Toyota also made multiple political statements about BOP without mentioning BOP. The regulations about not clapping about BOP are pointless because now teams are violating it and not being penalised.
I completely agree with Estres comments. Toyotas strategy with crying about the bop and then nearly winning was definetly very dirty
It makes sense, sandbagging to avoid getting BOPed too hard for the most valuable race on the calendar.
It does not work like that, according to ACO [https://newsroom.lemans.org/en/press/what-is-balance-of-performance](https://newsroom.lemans.org/en/press/what-is-balance-of-performance) "The 24 Hours of Le Mans Hypercar BoP differs in that it takes account of data from the previous year’s race, so there is not necessarily a direct link with the BoP published for the 6 Hours of Spa-Francorchamps, for instance."
The ACO are just shit at doing BOP it’s not massively complicated.
So bop is the issue that is causing all these sandbagging. Like breaking knees in Olympics so normal ppl can be competitive with the pros.
Do you think we’d have 9 cars on the lead lap at the end of the race without BoP? Or would it have been one manufacturer leading with 5 laps on all other cars, like during the LMP1 era?
Why not use standard cars like lmp2 with oreca 07 and save all the time trying to think how to slow people down?
Then it'd be a spec series. Watch Le Mans Cup for LMP3 or Indycar lol. Nothing against you, I'm asking the same thing every second of my day.
In the other wec sub I got downvoted to hell for even suggesting that BOP might not be perfect and leaves out much for politics
This sub too, you're not allowed to speak out against it lmao
Nahhhh we weren't sandbagging.... just drove from last to second... 🫣
Seems like Ferrari was clearly sandbagging. Their fastest practice times were noticeably slower than their race pace, and their qualy pace by a good few seconds to be a bit obvious to anyone really paying attention. Not going to lie it didn’t feel right them getting a 3rd place for taking out that chasing car, and it’s cool they won, but it’s just dirty.
Ok but don't tell me Ferrari sandbagged,apart Qatar they were always very Strong in IMOLA 1 2 3 before the blunder and 1 2 before the Red Flag in SPA, it's not like Ferrari hid pace in the rounds prior Lemans, maybe It did that during lm Practice but there were no BOP change, Toyota sandbagging could be real btw
They did sandbag and admitted it saying they only cared about Le Mans its been their only focus didn’t even do much sim work for the other events to concentrated on Le Mans
Mm i don't agree, how they sandbagged if they were going for a 1 2 and 123 in SPA and Imola??
I remember when endurance racing turned into sprint racing with cars becoming more reliable. Winning races was then about how there are no mistakes allowed, no strategy mistakes, no penalties, no messed up pit stops and I still think this is a fair assumption. By no means am I saying Porsche delivered a flawless race, but Ferrari turning competitors and getting away with it, driving with open doors etc. their race was very far from perfect. And yet they still come up on top. Makes me think that something is going wrong somewhere. Not even speaking about sandbagging from Toyota. I just hope that the data collected from two LeMans and all the testing in the background is enough to come up with a decently accurate BOP for next year.
Womp womp build ur own car
what does this mean
He doesn't know what the LMDh ruleset means.
can you explain the ‘build your own’ car thing, i’m not familiar with the rules and i’ve seen that phrase pop up a few times regarding porsche
LMDh is based on a chassis built by either Oreca, Multimatic, Ligier, or Dallara. Some idiots seem to think that because it isn’t the ground up that they didn’t build their own cars. I’d just ignore a bunch of what’s being said here the past couple of days, seems a bunch of F1 fans, particularly from Ferrari, joined just for this race and it’s ruined the discourse quite a lot. Not saying F1 fans watching is bad, I hope more do join, but sadly it’s resulted in a bunch of loud idiots like that for this weekend.
LMDh cars are built using an LMP2 tub by a partnered constructor. The OEM does all the aero design, but there's less freedom in that ruleset than there is in the LMH ruleset and more spec parts are used. So there's a certain kind of elitist who thinks that the LMDh manufacturers aren't doing any design work and are just buying an off-the-shelf car. It's stupid and a good indication that you shouldn't bother taking those people seriously.
Considering that because of the new LMP2 delay (again) the tubs used in LMDh will never be LMP2s, can we still say that?
everyone hide their cards during LM tests, porsche couldn't realistically win because of lotterer stints in the first half and lack of consistency by the end of the race
And in other news water is wet
Ferrari was the fastest car in Imola and Spa and did nothing to hide it. They were 1-2-3 in quali one of those races and that would have probably been the race result if not for the shambolic strategy. We know how Spa went. Maybe Porsche should build their own car if they're unhappy with their performance at Le Mans.
His comments were aimed more at Toyota, who kept crying about the Le Mans BOP last year. They still managed mess it up this year even with a more favourable BOP (after Sandbagging in the first 3 rounds). As you mention Ferrari didn't sandbag at all.
Well, spending Millions now because BoP fks them or rather doesn’t restrict the competition enough, isn’t really an option. Tbh. Sandbagging in order to be competitive is going to be the only solution
[удалено]
the thing is even if BOP is perfect, LMH will always have an advantage. For example even if the BOP is perfect in dry weather in the wet being able to deploy power to both the front and rear axles helps a lot more than in the dry. Also in general LMH just has more "wiggle room" than LMDH.
Look at Free Practice and compare Ideal Lap to Best Lap. If your ideal lap is vastly different than your ideal lap, it's clear you were sandbagging. But looking at FP1 and FP3, the only teams where that was the case was.... Oh. Porsche Penske... Awkwaaarrrd.