I was delighted when Brian Jones asked me to be part of the commentary team for the Silverstone 24 hour Britcar race. Partly because it is always nice to be asked to do something (far better than having to ask to do it), partly because it will take my mind off the fact that I am not at Road Atlanta for Petit Le Mans, and partly because I have never been to a 24 hour race at Silverstone, nor even to a Britcar race.
So, a weekend to look forward to, then. The timetable for the event is very busy indeed, with five support races taking place on Friday, October 1st, and a further eight races on the Saturday, before the 24 hour race itself starts at 4:30 in the afternoon. Considering that qualifying for all these events, not to mention day and night qualifying (and a warm-up) for the Britcar entrants all has to be squeezed in as well, the BRSCC is going to have a busy few days.
In comparison, I will have it fairly easy (I hope). Brian has asked me only to be involved in the Britcar race, which actually suits me fine, given my lack of familiarity with UK club race categories these days. And even then, I have been told to “arrange my own breaks” during the race itself.
So what is there actually to look forward to? More than 60 entrants in four classes, featuring everything from a fearsome Ferrari 430 to a humble Honda Civic. Not forgetting of course that this is merely one round of a nine-race season, which visits most of the leading UK circuits. And although I have to admit almost complete ignorance, having not been to a Britcar race before, the impression I get is that the series is built on the premise that the competitors’ needs are paramount, that entrants are to be encouraged, and that the competition thus arising will make for a spectacle that will attract spectators. A sort of “if you build it, they will come” philosophy.
Indeed, the very existence of the 24 hour race at Silverstone is very much down to James Tucker and his way of doing things. I have encountered James only twice – at the Nurburgring and at Le Mans 24 hour races – and I admire him for what he has contributed to what is after all a busy motor racing calendar. Britcar seems to me, an outsider, to have bridged the gap between the competitive track day driver and the committed club racer in a very inclusive way.
As for who will win, well, I am just not qualified to say. Personal allegiances would make the Rollcentre Mosler a favourite, and of course Martin Short is a former winner of the event. But it would seem foolish to exclude any of the Moslers, nor the (championship-leading) MJC Ferrari from a list of likely contenders. With a busy track, a wide disparity in driver abilities and car performance, keeping out of trouble and delivering consistent lap times will be key.
Hopefully, between Brian Jones, Matt James, Marcus Simmonds, Ben Evans and me, we’ll be able to stay on top of it, and it will be a good race.
Meanwhile, over the 'pond' in Atlanta, Georgia, Audi and Peugeot will be going head-to-head again in the second round of the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup, in the ten hour, or 1,000 mile Petit Le Mans race. On the basis of what happened at Silverstone a couple of weeks ago (see my earlier post, below) Peugeot starts as favourite. But I fancy that the R15 will be more suited to the circuit, and the team will be keen to ensure that Audi reliability has been restored after the differential failure that forced Allan McNish to retire at Silverstone. The weather forecast is currently good, so it should be a straight fight. But with ALMS championships up for grabs, there will be plenty of things to watch out for, if your focus is not on the Britcar at Silverstone.
A very good way to round off my season.
Thursday, 23 September 2010
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
1000kms
After the Silverstone 1,000kms someone who had best remain nameless in the press office said to me: “What did you think of that, Paul? Not very riveting, was it?”
Actually, I think riveting described the race perfectly. It may not have been thrilling, and it may not have had an action-packed battle for the overall lead after the problem that struck Allan McNish’s Audi R15 saw him abandon the car with barely half-an-hour completed; but I was riveted. Faultless races from four of the top seven contenders meant that the top four places were predictable, but somehow one had the feeling throughout that the unexpected was just around the corner.
In the end, Peugeot were worthy and deserving winners. They were the two fastest cars and both of them had better fuel consumption than the Audi. And there was the knowledge from the early stages of the race that both Peugeots were capable of overtaking the German cars, when the need arose. Which of course it did, thanks to the fact, as Bruno Famin admitted – in jest – before the start, that Peugeot had adopted Audi’s strategy of qualifying on the second row of the grid. But Timo Bernhard, sharing with Dindo Capello, looked particularly uncomfortable in the early stages of the race, and it seemed clear that neither Audi was going to keep the Peugeots behind for long.
Most impressive, on the new circuit, was the elapsed time, a whisker over five hours and ten minutes: the sort of time taken to complete the 1000kms in the late eighties, before the bulldozers took up permanent residence at Silverstone. I suppose that's appropriate enough, given the record distance achieved at Le Mans this year.
The race for the other classes was enlivened by the penalties handed out to each of the class leaders for transgressing the limits of the circuit. I would have thought that the indications were fairly clear throughout free practice that this was going to be closely watched by officialdom, and it wasn’t long before warnings, flags and penalties started to be issued. Of the three class leaders to suffer, only the LMP2 Strakka Racing HPD was able to recover, with neither the JMW Aston Martin nor Steve Zacchia’s Hope Polevision FLM car adequately dominant in its class to be able to recover, as the inimitable Danny Watts was able to.
It was a fascinating race though, and I am glad I was there. A reasonable crowd seems to have shown up to watch, the weather was kind to them, and the new track layout seemed to work well.
But on the evidence of what happened at Silverstone, it looks to me that Audi is going to have to work very hard indeed to reverse its fortunes in just three weeks time in Road Atlanta, or at Zhuhai, in China, for the final Intercontinental Le Mans Cup round at the beginning of November. I suspect that the R15 will not be remembered as fondly at Ingolstadt as either the R10 or the R8. Attention must now focus on the R18, but I suspect that Audi will have even stiffer competition in 2011 as new regulations come into force.
It’s too early to be thinking about it, but I suggest that 2011 has some very lofty possibilities. But like all lofty things, they can end up in disappointment. Let’s hope not, anyway.
Actually, I think riveting described the race perfectly. It may not have been thrilling, and it may not have had an action-packed battle for the overall lead after the problem that struck Allan McNish’s Audi R15 saw him abandon the car with barely half-an-hour completed; but I was riveted. Faultless races from four of the top seven contenders meant that the top four places were predictable, but somehow one had the feeling throughout that the unexpected was just around the corner.
In the end, Peugeot were worthy and deserving winners. They were the two fastest cars and both of them had better fuel consumption than the Audi. And there was the knowledge from the early stages of the race that both Peugeots were capable of overtaking the German cars, when the need arose. Which of course it did, thanks to the fact, as Bruno Famin admitted – in jest – before the start, that Peugeot had adopted Audi’s strategy of qualifying on the second row of the grid. But Timo Bernhard, sharing with Dindo Capello, looked particularly uncomfortable in the early stages of the race, and it seemed clear that neither Audi was going to keep the Peugeots behind for long.
Most impressive, on the new circuit, was the elapsed time, a whisker over five hours and ten minutes: the sort of time taken to complete the 1000kms in the late eighties, before the bulldozers took up permanent residence at Silverstone. I suppose that's appropriate enough, given the record distance achieved at Le Mans this year.
The race for the other classes was enlivened by the penalties handed out to each of the class leaders for transgressing the limits of the circuit. I would have thought that the indications were fairly clear throughout free practice that this was going to be closely watched by officialdom, and it wasn’t long before warnings, flags and penalties started to be issued. Of the three class leaders to suffer, only the LMP2 Strakka Racing HPD was able to recover, with neither the JMW Aston Martin nor Steve Zacchia’s Hope Polevision FLM car adequately dominant in its class to be able to recover, as the inimitable Danny Watts was able to.
It was a fascinating race though, and I am glad I was there. A reasonable crowd seems to have shown up to watch, the weather was kind to them, and the new track layout seemed to work well.
But on the evidence of what happened at Silverstone, it looks to me that Audi is going to have to work very hard indeed to reverse its fortunes in just three weeks time in Road Atlanta, or at Zhuhai, in China, for the final Intercontinental Le Mans Cup round at the beginning of November. I suspect that the R15 will not be remembered as fondly at Ingolstadt as either the R10 or the R8. Attention must now focus on the R18, but I suspect that Audi will have even stiffer competition in 2011 as new regulations come into force.
It’s too early to be thinking about it, but I suggest that 2011 has some very lofty possibilities. But like all lofty things, they can end up in disappointment. Let’s hope not, anyway.
Friday, 3 September 2010
September comment for dailysportscar
Well, my column for dailysportscar.com has just gone in for typesetting. I won't post it here - might increase dsc subscriber lists if I force you to go there... but the theme of the piece is the McQueen rant (see below), then a few grumbles about driving standards and team orders.
Not particularly insightful, but it keeps my name in the limelight (?) until after the Silverstone 1000kms, when hopefully I'll be able to produce another of my analysis pieces.
It promises to be a good race actually - it will be interesting to see if the Audis are anywhere near the pace of the Peugeots. And I'm looking forward to seeing the new Arena track layout. Not sure whether we'll be using Stowe or Becketts boxes at the moment (or maybe both!) Hopefully the weather will be kind, and here's to the success of the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup!
Not particularly insightful, but it keeps my name in the limelight (?) until after the Silverstone 1000kms, when hopefully I'll be able to produce another of my analysis pieces.
It promises to be a good race actually - it will be interesting to see if the Audis are anywhere near the pace of the Peugeots. And I'm looking forward to seeing the new Arena track layout. Not sure whether we'll be using Stowe or Becketts boxes at the moment (or maybe both!) Hopefully the weather will be kind, and here's to the success of the Intercontinental Le Mans Cup!
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
Audi A5 Cabriolet
Thanks to the generosity of David Ingram at Audi UK, I have had the opportunity to drive an A5 cabrio for the past week. And to be brutally honest, I'm not quite sure what to make of it. It's a 2.0 TFSI (petrol), manual gearbox, and having played briefly with the 'configurator' on Audi's website, it will end up costing not much short of £40,000 if you were to buy one (it's the S-line). Which is about the same as the S4 Avant that I bought exactly a year ago today.
The main problem is that I can't quite decide about convertibles. I had the top down as much as possible, but it was only warm enough to make it a real pleasure on a couple of occasions. That's not a criticism of the car, as much as it is of the English climate. And unlike the R8 Spyder, it doesn't have that jaw-dropping impact on passers-by, which brings me to my second problem... is it an A5 or an A4? Back seat room is less than on my S4, and the luggage space is certainly less. And only specialists in the trademark 'fairy-light' patterns will notice the difference from the front. To me, the A5 sportback and the coupe look a bit special, and that distinctiveness is lost with the cabriolet.
Having said all that, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the car. It performs reasonably (211 PS), and it is a good drive. And it is a very good-looking car, it has a certain elegance about it that gives you a feel-good factor as you drive. The fuel consumption is good and it features many of the clever tricks that you would expect. Auto-stop/start, electronic handbrake, extending seat belt supports, all make the driving experience better. And I was impressed by the courtesy lights for the rear seat passengers embedded in the roof.
I suppose if you do not have the family requirements that I do, then it becomes a very sensible buy. And on the two days of the year when the weather is good enough - it's unbeatable!
The real drawback (and apologies, this may be merely that I couldn't find the right button) was that it seemed impossible to open the boot without removing the key from the ignition and using the remote control to release the catch. I expect there was a button somewhere, but it wasn't obvious, neither to me, nor the man who came to collect the car!
There is certainly something a bit special about convertibles, but I am not sure that they warrant the asking price. Your thoughts welcome below.
The main problem is that I can't quite decide about convertibles. I had the top down as much as possible, but it was only warm enough to make it a real pleasure on a couple of occasions. That's not a criticism of the car, as much as it is of the English climate. And unlike the R8 Spyder, it doesn't have that jaw-dropping impact on passers-by, which brings me to my second problem... is it an A5 or an A4? Back seat room is less than on my S4, and the luggage space is certainly less. And only specialists in the trademark 'fairy-light' patterns will notice the difference from the front. To me, the A5 sportback and the coupe look a bit special, and that distinctiveness is lost with the cabriolet.
Having said all that, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the car. It performs reasonably (211 PS), and it is a good drive. And it is a very good-looking car, it has a certain elegance about it that gives you a feel-good factor as you drive. The fuel consumption is good and it features many of the clever tricks that you would expect. Auto-stop/start, electronic handbrake, extending seat belt supports, all make the driving experience better. And I was impressed by the courtesy lights for the rear seat passengers embedded in the roof.
I suppose if you do not have the family requirements that I do, then it becomes a very sensible buy. And on the two days of the year when the weather is good enough - it's unbeatable!
The real drawback (and apologies, this may be merely that I couldn't find the right button) was that it seemed impossible to open the boot without removing the key from the ignition and using the remote control to release the catch. I expect there was a button somewhere, but it wasn't obvious, neither to me, nor the man who came to collect the car!
There is certainly something a bit special about convertibles, but I am not sure that they warrant the asking price. Your thoughts welcome below.
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
A brief rant...
I am getting increasingly annoyed by the appearance of Steve McQueen’s pictures on various Le Mans ‘history’ websites. Even the ACO’s own website now has his picture alongside a caption “L’Histoire d’une course légendaire”. Without wanting to go into a review of the movie – although I might – the plain fact of the matter is that Steve McQueen was a movie actor, who never participated in the race, and apart from the film, has no connection with it. If you’re going to show the picture of a movie legend associated with the race, then show Paul Newman’s face – at least he finished on the podium.
The twenty-first century is dominated by icons – I have them all over my computer, for goodness’ sake; and the beauty of an icon is that in a single (hopefully simple) image, you can convey a whole lot of meaning. Steve McQueen may be iconic, but I would rather see the “Legend of Le Mans” meaning conveyed by a more appropriate image. The Le Mans start, for example, wasn’t only used at Le Mans, but was something very special to the race, and conveys very well the historic era.
Other Le Mans images would be the old Dunlop Bridge and the descent to the esses –somewhat easier to depict, perhaps, than drivers running across the track to their cars, or one that does it for me, a picture of a car, any car, rounding the old Mulsanne Corner, hugging the wall on the inside, with a marshal – or better yet, a gendarme – standing atop like a beacon.
Surely these would be more suitable images than a McQueen’s V-sign?
There is a tendency for movies, based on truth, but not accurate reflections of the truth, to become accepted - in particular, I am thinking of various Hollywood war movies which have americanised British war heroes - and anything that dilutes truth is a bad thing, in my book.
By all means let us rejoice in the history of Le Mans, in the legend that the race has become, but please let us use some more suitable iconic images than Gulf 917s and movie actors!
The twenty-first century is dominated by icons – I have them all over my computer, for goodness’ sake; and the beauty of an icon is that in a single (hopefully simple) image, you can convey a whole lot of meaning. Steve McQueen may be iconic, but I would rather see the “Legend of Le Mans” meaning conveyed by a more appropriate image. The Le Mans start, for example, wasn’t only used at Le Mans, but was something very special to the race, and conveys very well the historic era.
Other Le Mans images would be the old Dunlop Bridge and the descent to the esses –somewhat easier to depict, perhaps, than drivers running across the track to their cars, or one that does it for me, a picture of a car, any car, rounding the old Mulsanne Corner, hugging the wall on the inside, with a marshal – or better yet, a gendarme – standing atop like a beacon.
Surely these would be more suitable images than a McQueen’s V-sign?
There is a tendency for movies, based on truth, but not accurate reflections of the truth, to become accepted - in particular, I am thinking of various Hollywood war movies which have americanised British war heroes - and anything that dilutes truth is a bad thing, in my book.
By all means let us rejoice in the history of Le Mans, in the legend that the race has become, but please let us use some more suitable iconic images than Gulf 917s and movie actors!
Friday, 23 July 2010
Classics
I have mentioned before that there seems to be a great deal of sportscar racing these days – the month of May was congested generally, and July and August are particularly busy if you are involved in the American Le Mans Series.
In theory, this is good for spectators and entrants alike, as there is clearly a greater supply of sportscar races than there is a demand. However, this means of course that the quality of the individual events is somewhat less. Just as in Formula 1 racing (I do struggle to call them Grands Prix), there may be too much.
The same tendency is now happening in the field of historic racing cars. So far this year we have had the Monaco Historique, the Le Mans Classic and with the Silverstone Classic and the Goodwood Revival meetings still to come there is ample opportunity to see historic cars of all shapes and sizes in some wonderful settings. And now I read of the ‘Legends of Motorsports’ to be run at Sebring in December.
But.
There had to be a ‘but’, didn’t there? And I have to admit that I haven’t been to, nor am I planning to go to any of these events this year. I used to go regularly to Silverstone, to what was then the ‘Coys Historic Festival’ (no need to use the word ‘Classic’ then), and I have been to Goodwood’s Revival, although that was a good few years ago as well now. I enjoyed visiting the Masters Festival at Brand Hatch on the late May Bank Holiday weekend earlier this year: as always at such events, the access to the paddock was marvellous, and my son relished the opportunity to sit in a 1960’s Ford Mustang, whose driver was happy to stop and chat.
I was tempted to suggest that ‘Classic Racing’ is an oxymoron, but that would be unfair. I much prefer the term ‘Historic Racing’, and I am the first to say how much I enjoy seeing old cars out on the track and competing, much more than in museums. I do like museums by the way, but I fear that might the subject of a different essay. What I dislike is (a) when owners of historic machinery restore them beyond ‘reasonable limits’ to be more competitive and (b) when competitiveness becomes excessive and the racing gets out of perspective.
There is probably a greater disparity in driver talents in historic racing than in any other form of motor sport. I find it a shame that some of the ‘heroes’ of historic racing haven’t been able to find recognition elsewhere. Drivers like Martin Stretton, Barrie Williams, Frank Sytner and Gerry Marshall all competed in contemporary cars as well, but were undoubtedly at their peaks when driving historic cars. And at the same time, wealthy amateurs were having a go in their pride and joy – but did it really matter who won? Well, yes, of course it did, but you weren’t going to re-write the history book as a result.
What Historic (or Classic) racing lacks is gravitas. At the end of the day, winning in a historic race does not make the Ferrari 512P quicker, slower, better or worse than a Porsche 917. Particularly if the pair of them get beaten by a Lola T70 Mk III. Indeed those are all anyway somewhat subjective matters. What matters is whether the car won in its day or not. I doubt whether historic racing in forty years time will involve Peugeot 908s or Audi R15s, but if it does, and a Peugeot wins, it will not change the fact that Audi scored a clean sweep of the podium positions at Le Mans this year. That was important. That was what the manufacturers were spending millions of Euros trying to do.
A favourite car of mine is the Aston Martin DBR1 that won Le Mans in 1959. It is great that the very same car often appears in Classic races, as well that it often wins. But there is a danger that the notion enters the consciousness of the common fan that this car was dominant. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact that it won the Le Mans 24 hour race was totally unexpected (and a credit to John Wyer’s skill as a master tactician).
It’s a bit like having a tour around a WWII battleship. You can stare up and marvel at the big guns, squash down into the rating’s quarters, or stand up on the bridge and gaze through the windows, narrow your eyes and visualise an enemy coastline. But you can’t truly imagine the emotion of being in the heat of battle without talking to someone who was really there, and is prepared to talk to you about it.
That’s why folk like Stirling Moss, David Piper, Richard Attwood and Jackie Oliver are important. Get them out in the cars, and their juices start to flow. What’s important is to listen. Learn from history and you have the chance not to repeat it – I know, I am paraphrasing, but therein lies truth.
I’ve got nothing against historic racing in general. The very fact that it is hugely popular with spectators and competitors, is not (always) outrageously expensive and it provides a way of extending the active life of cars that might otherwise stay in garages is a vindication of the genre. And if the opportunity would arise, I would go to any of the events I have mentioned without hesitation. But not all of them.
My concern is that these events represent organisers attempting to cash in on commercial benefits and once again offer us, the consumer, more than is good for us. A lack of moderation seems to be a sign of the times we live in.
In theory, this is good for spectators and entrants alike, as there is clearly a greater supply of sportscar races than there is a demand. However, this means of course that the quality of the individual events is somewhat less. Just as in Formula 1 racing (I do struggle to call them Grands Prix), there may be too much.
The same tendency is now happening in the field of historic racing cars. So far this year we have had the Monaco Historique, the Le Mans Classic and with the Silverstone Classic and the Goodwood Revival meetings still to come there is ample opportunity to see historic cars of all shapes and sizes in some wonderful settings. And now I read of the ‘Legends of Motorsports’ to be run at Sebring in December.
But.
There had to be a ‘but’, didn’t there? And I have to admit that I haven’t been to, nor am I planning to go to any of these events this year. I used to go regularly to Silverstone, to what was then the ‘Coys Historic Festival’ (no need to use the word ‘Classic’ then), and I have been to Goodwood’s Revival, although that was a good few years ago as well now. I enjoyed visiting the Masters Festival at Brand Hatch on the late May Bank Holiday weekend earlier this year: as always at such events, the access to the paddock was marvellous, and my son relished the opportunity to sit in a 1960’s Ford Mustang, whose driver was happy to stop and chat.
I was tempted to suggest that ‘Classic Racing’ is an oxymoron, but that would be unfair. I much prefer the term ‘Historic Racing’, and I am the first to say how much I enjoy seeing old cars out on the track and competing, much more than in museums. I do like museums by the way, but I fear that might the subject of a different essay. What I dislike is (a) when owners of historic machinery restore them beyond ‘reasonable limits’ to be more competitive and (b) when competitiveness becomes excessive and the racing gets out of perspective.
There is probably a greater disparity in driver talents in historic racing than in any other form of motor sport. I find it a shame that some of the ‘heroes’ of historic racing haven’t been able to find recognition elsewhere. Drivers like Martin Stretton, Barrie Williams, Frank Sytner and Gerry Marshall all competed in contemporary cars as well, but were undoubtedly at their peaks when driving historic cars. And at the same time, wealthy amateurs were having a go in their pride and joy – but did it really matter who won? Well, yes, of course it did, but you weren’t going to re-write the history book as a result.
What Historic (or Classic) racing lacks is gravitas. At the end of the day, winning in a historic race does not make the Ferrari 512P quicker, slower, better or worse than a Porsche 917. Particularly if the pair of them get beaten by a Lola T70 Mk III. Indeed those are all anyway somewhat subjective matters. What matters is whether the car won in its day or not. I doubt whether historic racing in forty years time will involve Peugeot 908s or Audi R15s, but if it does, and a Peugeot wins, it will not change the fact that Audi scored a clean sweep of the podium positions at Le Mans this year. That was important. That was what the manufacturers were spending millions of Euros trying to do.
A favourite car of mine is the Aston Martin DBR1 that won Le Mans in 1959. It is great that the very same car often appears in Classic races, as well that it often wins. But there is a danger that the notion enters the consciousness of the common fan that this car was dominant. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact that it won the Le Mans 24 hour race was totally unexpected (and a credit to John Wyer’s skill as a master tactician).
It’s a bit like having a tour around a WWII battleship. You can stare up and marvel at the big guns, squash down into the rating’s quarters, or stand up on the bridge and gaze through the windows, narrow your eyes and visualise an enemy coastline. But you can’t truly imagine the emotion of being in the heat of battle without talking to someone who was really there, and is prepared to talk to you about it.
That’s why folk like Stirling Moss, David Piper, Richard Attwood and Jackie Oliver are important. Get them out in the cars, and their juices start to flow. What’s important is to listen. Learn from history and you have the chance not to repeat it – I know, I am paraphrasing, but therein lies truth.
I’ve got nothing against historic racing in general. The very fact that it is hugely popular with spectators and competitors, is not (always) outrageously expensive and it provides a way of extending the active life of cars that might otherwise stay in garages is a vindication of the genre. And if the opportunity would arise, I would go to any of the events I have mentioned without hesitation. But not all of them.
My concern is that these events represent organisers attempting to cash in on commercial benefits and once again offer us, the consumer, more than is good for us. A lack of moderation seems to be a sign of the times we live in.
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
Bruno Famin's press release
So, Peugeot has issued the results of their post mortem. I am not sure how my readers (if there are any) actually find their way here, but it can be found in full on dailysportscar.com (or www.endurance-info.com if you don't want to subscribe to dailysportscar). And you really need to have read both that and my own post Le Mans thoughts - which have been published only on dailysportscar.com - to make sense of this. On the assumption that you have, I shall proceed.
Firstly, I am impressed by Bruno Famin. I am also impressed by the English translation of his statement. (If only the publishers of the Le Mans annual would use the same translator, but that's another issue.)
Famin seems to get to the heart of Peugeot's engine problem without attributing any blame. It seems an honest and open analysis of what went wrong. There is the slight open question of what happened at the Sebring test, when a Peugeot arrived in the pits with a similar-looking flame from the exhaust pipe, looking suspiciously like an engine failure. Whether this alerted the men from Velizy to a conrod problem, and led to the development of the new part, we don't know.
It looks to me that the fundamental problem that Peugeot faced is the one of finding out where the limit is. I am reminded of one of Gilles Villeneuve's first tests in a Formula 1 car, when he spent the first session spinning at various corners, then went faster than anyone else had in the same car. In order to understand the limit, you need to go over it. Having a car that is reliable in testing is no use at all if your tests are not simulating race conditions.
By Famin's own admission, Peugeot's experience at Le Mans is limited to the four occasions they've been there since 2007. And of course Audi's experience since their debut in 1999 is augmented by all that they've learnt in their partnership with Joest Racing. In Famin's words: 'il est difficile de tout maîtriser' (or 'it is very difficult to master everything').
As Audi discovered in 2009, when the R15's radiators got clogged up.
In a way, I find all this heartening: it shows that Le Mans is still a massive challenge, not just for the privateers, but also for the rich manufacturers. I feel that I can now draw a line under the 2010 race - what a classic.
And I hope that between now and the end of the year, we get a good set of regulations for next year's race, which will enable next year's race to be the starting point of a new era of sportscar racing.
Firstly, I am impressed by Bruno Famin. I am also impressed by the English translation of his statement. (If only the publishers of the Le Mans annual would use the same translator, but that's another issue.)
Famin seems to get to the heart of Peugeot's engine problem without attributing any blame. It seems an honest and open analysis of what went wrong. There is the slight open question of what happened at the Sebring test, when a Peugeot arrived in the pits with a similar-looking flame from the exhaust pipe, looking suspiciously like an engine failure. Whether this alerted the men from Velizy to a conrod problem, and led to the development of the new part, we don't know.
It looks to me that the fundamental problem that Peugeot faced is the one of finding out where the limit is. I am reminded of one of Gilles Villeneuve's first tests in a Formula 1 car, when he spent the first session spinning at various corners, then went faster than anyone else had in the same car. In order to understand the limit, you need to go over it. Having a car that is reliable in testing is no use at all if your tests are not simulating race conditions.
By Famin's own admission, Peugeot's experience at Le Mans is limited to the four occasions they've been there since 2007. And of course Audi's experience since their debut in 1999 is augmented by all that they've learnt in their partnership with Joest Racing. In Famin's words: 'il est difficile de tout maîtriser' (or 'it is very difficult to master everything').
As Audi discovered in 2009, when the R15's radiators got clogged up.
In a way, I find all this heartening: it shows that Le Mans is still a massive challenge, not just for the privateers, but also for the rich manufacturers. I feel that I can now draw a line under the 2010 race - what a classic.
And I hope that between now and the end of the year, we get a good set of regulations for next year's race, which will enable next year's race to be the starting point of a new era of sportscar racing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
