# Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

No, it's not factory-backed, but Cytosport's AER-Powered Lola will contest P1 in the ALMS against the Audis, and that's something Porsche and Acura can't claim.
Read more on the ALMS site here...
http://www.americanlemans.com/...=3398


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_No, it's not factory-backed, but Cytosport's AER-Powered Lola will contest P1 in the ALMS against the Audis, and that's something Porsche and Acura can't claim.


No, they just continue to beat Audi with a "lesser" car.


----------



## R10_Telemetry (Feb 19, 2007)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (.:RDriver)*

That's either the most unintelligent post I've seen or a heavily sarcastic remark - I hope it's the latter. If Audi had decided to run in LMP2, they too would be running faster than the LMP1 cars due to the current rules and regulations. Of course, if there was only one prototype class, there would be no cause for discussion.


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (R10_Telemetry)*

It was heavily sarcastic, but, since you brought it up, what about the current rules package would allow Audi to run faster with a P2 car?
Since IMSA is now using the ACO restrictors on the P2 cars, there shouldnt be anything in the rules still favoring the P2 cars.
I'd be really interested in hearing what it is about the rules currently that would allow a P2 car to be faster than a P1 car.
I think the bottom line (and not a slam on Audi at all) is that they have a car that is currently build to race on one track...Le Mans. The car is obviously at a disadvantage on many US tracks due to it size and enormous wheelbase.
That being said, I also FIRMLY believe that Audi is not showing us all they have. When they want to they are putting down times at least as fast if not faster than the P2 cars without an issue, however, they seem to continue to come in second. I believe that if there were more P1 competition here we wouldnt be seeing the Audi "struggle" as much as it has.
If I'm wrong, please share what it is that allows the P2 cars to continue to dominate the racing we are seeing.


----------



## R10_Telemetry (Feb 19, 2007)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (.:RDriver)*

The key to all this is in the fuel/weight ratio and refueling times. It's impossible for me to explain it thoroughly in this forum, but it is likely that you may hear about it at some point before the end of the season in the press or otherwise. You can probably see some of the effects by timing the LMP1 vs. LMP2 refueling and then considering total fuel capacities and then fuel consumption compared to weight. If both types of cars were on equal footings, the R10s would probably finish the race 30 sec ahead of the LMP2s. As you noted, this is not an engine/chassis performance issue despite being heavier, larger, longer wheelbase, etc.


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (R10_Telemetry)*

But at Le Mans, the diesels got better mileage than anyone else, so what does fuel consumption vs. weight have to do with it?
Also, the rules for fueling and such are all ACO mandated, not IMSA and they didnt seem to be a problem in Europe, why now?
Lastly, the ACO reduced the fuel cell size to try to even out the mileage game to give petrol a chance. Also they slowed down your refueling because last year it was an advantage to diesel since the fuel you used apparently was less viscous than normal diesel that the original filler size was based on.
Now granted, I havent been timing stops, nor been able to truly see what is happening during the race while out on track working it. But to this point from what I've read and talked with people about, it seems that the rules more than favor the diesel in most aspects of the package right now and nowhere but in the ALMS right now is P2 challenging P1 like it is, they certainly werent close at Le Mans.
To me it seems more of an issue of the R10 handling the American tracks and format, OR, its simply not pushing as hard as possible since the need isnt there.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (.:RDriver)*

As far as the LMP1 vs LMP2 thing goes, Porsche's Helmut Kristen says that he thinks that the R8 if run to the rules package closest to the current regs as far as engine power and minimum weight(2002), it would out run the R10, and anailalte the LMP2 cars. Also, Penske's guys have seem to have found something out. I'm not saying that it's illegal, but it may be what late Penske Can Am driver Mark Donohue would dub the ever elusive "unfair advantage"-that one thing that one has that no one else does that give them a advantage. 
Face it, Penske has their stops down as good as the Audi guys. Why it takes so much longer seemingly for Audi to fill up their 81 liter diesel tanks than for Penske to fill their 90 liter gas tanks is beyond me. It may be the refueling rig restictor. But they're suposed to be to ACO specs, and if something was illegal with Penske's rigs, IMSA would've found something by now. And since IMSA hasn't, and with the assumption that one is innocent until proven guilty, I'd assume that there's nothing fishy going on there. Roger doesn't play the game that way. That's why I respect the guy-he, like the guys at Audi, never stops thinking.
I think that the 2:45 time allotment and the style of circuit kind of plays in to the LMP2 car's hands here more than in Europe. The European "Tilke-dromes"(tracks that Jimmy might not be a big fan of, it one reads the Favoite American Tracks thread in the Sports car category of the Pro Racing section) favor the Peugoet 908s in the LMS. However, the 908s would struggle worse than the R10s at some circuits, because, as some have said, the R10 is like a tank, the 908 is like a F1 car. European tracks anymore are silky smooth, and have lots of slow corners and chicanes. American tracks are bumpy, fast, sweeping, twisty, and, as JJ Lehto said, "requires the drivers to have balls".
Also, there are no factory backed or factory supported LMP2 teams in the LMS right now-IE, no Acuras or Porsche. And believe me, Peugoet would b**** every bit as much, if not more, that Audi. Hopefully there will be the rumored Audi vs Peugoet rematch at the Silverstone and Interlogos LMS rounds. That might show if the LMP2's proformance in the ALMS is due to the fact that their just that good in the ALMS, or is it just that they're factory backed or supported, as Silverstone(partly an airfield like Sebring) and Interlogos(similar to many US tracks-bumpy, twisty, and fast) is similar to many ALMS tracks.
Although R10 Telemetry may know more(a lot more!) about this stuff than I(a common race fan) do, I have to agree with Jimmy-Audi didn't have trouble with having some of the fastest stops at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, so why have so much trouble here? Either Audi's pit crew isn't showing all their cards for whatever reason, or something is really wrong.
I'm not a big fan(nor is Jimmy) of IMSA allowing the LMP2 cars run with the LMP1 cars-nor, ironically, is Porsche, who've been the biggest benefactor of this situation. And the LMP2 ACO restictor reduction wasn't applied at first by IMSA, but IMSA said(and Porsche and Acura agreed) if Porsche and Acura's cars were getting too fast, IMSA would crank down the restictors.
Hopefully, the situation will right itself within the next few months. The LMP2 cars will be forced to carry 110lbs of ballast next year in the ALMS and LMS if the ACO get their way. This may help the ACO achive their goal of getting "factory teams"(Porsche and Acura) into LMP1(which it is rumored that Acura will partner with Zytec to make a gas or E10/electric hybird LMP1 car- just go to http://www.mulsanescorner.com and visit the news section). And the diesels will probably get a 5-10% air restictor cut.
If worse comes to worse, at least Henri Pescarolo might follow through on his threat to come to the US and race in the ALMS. IMSA's gain and the LMS/ACO's loss is the way I see it. Problem is that if IMSA doesn't right away adopt the 825 kg minimum weight and he races here, he might complain that the "factory" LMP2 cars are too fast-which, rightfully or wrongfully so depending on your point of view, would give Audi all the ammo they need to get that rule's break.
I say, put a good LMP1(fast as, or faster than the LMP2s) car out there in the ALMS, and we'll see(maybe) what Audi can really do.
As for the time being, Audi are coming to some tracks(Road America, Mosport, Road Atlanta, and, to a lesser degree, Laguna Seca, with Belle Isle being a big unknow to every one and could, based on the circuit's layout, could go either way) where they can get their momentum back. 
Good Luck to Audi Sport for the rest of the season!

_Modified by chernaudi at 4:50 PM 7-23-2007_

_Modified by chernaudi at 4:53 PM 7-23-2007_

_Modified by chernaudi at 5:01 PM 7-23-2007_


_Modified by chernaudi at 5:01 PM 7-23-2007_


----------



## NSalvatore (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (chernaudi)*

I just wanted to throw in my two cents on this...I have been reading the Audi Sport page for a bit here....
First off...reguarding shrinking the Audi Fuel cell to put it more in line with petrol. 
What I dont understand is if TDI was to give them an advantage and ACO wanted to leverage this to reduce cell size to put it on pace with the petrol cars they failed....using Mid Ohio as an example the R10 had to go 5-7 laps LESS on a tank of fuel then the P2 cars. I understand in gearing back the cell to make it even, but in this case its not even, the R10 tank delivers some 10 miles less. 
Second...pit stops....
I was furious listening to the radio Saturday during the race. And I wasnt the only one...Micheal the ALMS announcer was totally confused also....here is the scinerio....
Race starts...Pirro gets to the front, by the end of the first hour he has close to a 15 second lead on the RS Spyders. Audi stops, refuels, tires and driver change. By the time they cycle through stops the Penske that trailed by 15 seconds was now up 5 seconds after the bit stop. Penske did the same thing, fuel, tyres, driver change. 
Werner, now in the car is trailing by 5 seconds in second place...over the next hour he makes up the 5 seconds on the spyder and toward the two hour mark, Audi is back in front by five seconds. 
At this point both Audi and Porsche pit on the SAME LAP together....Audi in the pits 5 seconds before. Both get fuel and tires. 
By the time the pit stop is over, Audi now trails by 17 seconds. 
ALL THAT HAPPENED WAS A PIT STOP! 
Werner closed 7 sec in the final 45 minutes to finish 3rd at 10 seconds back.

Audi had clean stops both times, no issues or repairs. Looking back at pit times Audi was in the pits somewhere around 2:45 seconds for two stops. The Porsche was mid 2:0X. Close to 40 seconds diffrence. 
They where turning 1:11-1:13 laps. 
At this rate Audi needs to run almost an entire extra lap over the P2 cars to win or just break even here....combine that with fuel tanks that are supose to be "fair" and actually allow LESS then the petrol cars...doesnt make sense. 
Add into that the Pitstops and I am frustrated. 
Not to mention Dindo who was put of fcourse in corner 2 on Lap 1. McNish drove like a mad man after the first stop making up the entire lap down and ending the day in 5th on the same lap...that was some driving! 
Going forward...these are true "Audi" tracks comming up...Road America (4hrs), Mo Sport, Detroit (very favorable P1 layout), Road Atlanta (10 hrs) and Laguna Seca....Audi should win all of these the exception being Laguna that might be tough. 
If anyone has some feed back on the above I would love to hear it...just a passionate race fan. You have to wonder what the hell is Audi's motivation to keep making world class innovative products like TDI etc, only for them to be slapped on the wrist and told "now now" thats not playing nice, the others dont have a chance. 
Gove Audi the same size fuel tank and take off the fueling regs...like it should be...and Audi walks away with that race in Ohio.








*vent over*


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (NSalvatore)*


_Quote, originally posted by *NSalvatore* »_I just wanted to throw in my two cents on this...I have been reading the Audi Sport page for a bit here....
First off...reguarding shrinking the Audi Fuel cell to put it more in line with petrol. 
What I dont understand is if TDI was to give them an advantage and ACO wanted to leverage this to reduce cell size to put it on pace with the petrol cars they failed....using Mid Ohio as an example the R10 had to go 5-7 laps LESS on a tank of fuel then the P2 cars. I understand in gearing back the cell to make it even, but in this case its not even, the R10 tank delivers some 10 miles less. 

Why is this becoming a factor now? This hasnt been a problem before and at Le Mans, where it was said that they would get worse mileage due to the amount of time at full throttle on that track, they still got better mileage and ran more laps than the petrol cars did.
Is it maybe some fantastic adjustment Porsche/Penske has done to increase mileage? Could it be the difference that the ethanol is making in the Porsche engine since they are now running it (saying that mostly sarcastically), or is it something else with Audi not getting good mileage or playing some games about it? 
The point is, mileage hasnt been an issue in the past and the diesel has always been better than petrol.

_Quote, originally posted by *NSalvatore* »_Second...pit stops....
I was furious listening to the radio Saturday during the race. And I wasnt the only one...Micheal the ALMS announcer was totally confused also....here is the scinerio....
Race starts...Pirro gets to the front, by the end of the first hour he has close to a 15 second lead on the RS Spyders. Audi stops, refuels, tires and driver change. By the time they cycle through stops the Penske that trailed by 15 seconds was now up 5 seconds after the bit stop. Penske did the same thing, fuel, tyres, driver change. 
Werner, now in the car is trailing by 5 seconds in second place...over the next hour he makes up the 5 seconds on the spyder and toward the two hour mark, Audi is back in front by five seconds. 
At this point both Audi and Porsche pit on the SAME LAP together....Audi in the pits 5 seconds before. Both get fuel and tires. 
By the time the pit stop is over, Audi now trails by 17 seconds. 
ALL THAT HAPPENED WAS A PIT STOP! 
Werner closed 7 sec in the final 45 minutes to finish 3rd at 10 seconds back.

Audi had clean stops both times, no issues or repairs. Looking back at pit times Audi was in the pits somewhere around 2:45 seconds for two stops. The Porsche was mid 2:0X. Close to 40 seconds diffrence. 

Good question, what happened? Why was this not the case at Le Mans? Why was this not a problem earlier in the year? Did IMSA just implement some rule or change to the Audi fueling rigs that I didnt hear about?
I'm just curious as to how the rules are all of a sudden an issue.


----------



## R10_Telemetry (Feb 19, 2007)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (.:RDriver)*

NSalvatore is amazingly correct on all points. Jimmy, despite the fact that you are sometimes standing right next to me in the Audi pits, you are still too far removed from intricacies of our situation. I can not convey all the findings of 70+ professionally degreed engineers here, since I neither have the time nor the legal ability to share this information. But rest assured that the dozen of people that pour over the data we collect at every race are well qualified to come to these conclusions. The chance that anyone could possibly come up with a better explanation based on anything but the facts of the data would be a trillion to one. This may sound very German, but logic must prevail here. When you're not busy shooting for Mazda at the next race, stop by our Engineering trailer and we can talk further.


----------



## NSalvatore (Dec 24, 2004)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (R10_Telemetry)*

R10...PM sent.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (NSalvatore)*

And it should be noted that the fuel tank was to put the R10s equal with the LMP1 cars-of which there are few in the ALMS, let alone any that can keep up even with the slowest of the LMP2s.
The LMP2/675 have always gotten slightly better fuel mileage, due to the lighter weight/smaller engines they use. The Dyson Lola AER ex LMP675 cars almost always had 1-2 laps better fuel economy against the R8. Maybe the ACO forgot that-or they expected that IMSA would restict the LMP2 cars like they did in the LMS, which hasn't really made much of a difference. Also, the smaller restictors on the LMP2 reduces top end power, while increasing fuel economy.
That's one thing that might help out the R10 if IMSA and the ACO reduce the R10's restictors next year. They'll give up 40-60hp, but the LMP2s gave up 20-30 hp, and it hasn't slowed them down one bit. Just remeber that the R8 in '03 ran with a 10% smaller restictor than in previous years, and it still went faster at almost all ALMS cicuits-even Mosport and Road America-dispite giving up 50-60hp. The reason: The cars handled/cornered better in the faster corners, and the cars had reduced wheelspin(no traction control on the Audi R8 remember), and the restrictors don't do anything to torque, so acceleration also wasn't affected. The same theories should work out for the R10-they still have a power advantage and a huge torque advantage. And then they may be able to match the LMP2s on fuel mileage.


----------



## .:RDriver (Oct 4, 1999)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (R10_Telemetry)*

You're right, while I am there all the time, I dont have the time or need to keep up to date on all the intricacies of the rules etc. Hell, when I'm out shooting I hardly know who is winning till I get to the podium (I was actually extremely surprised to see Porsche won overall this past weekend as the Audi pretty much walked away from them at the beginning of the race).
But that is why I'm asking here. I know that the answer is probably not a simple one liner, but I am curious as to why the tables have seemed to turn.
I dont recall fueling times to have been a problem in the past or at Le Mans...what has changed that?
I dont recall hearing about mileage problems for the Audis in the past or at Le Mans...what has changed that?
The only rule change I'm aware of since the beginning of the season was the restrictors on the P2 cars...what has changed.
Audi didnt seem to have a problem at Sebring or St. Pete. Problems on the streets of Long Beach and Houston made sense due to the tight course and the size of the R10. Then all of a sudden at SLC, LRP and Mid O the car seems to be struggling with slower stops and less mileage (or so I've been told as I havent actually seen any of those races yet), so whats the deal? What changed?
BTW, PM sent.


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (.:RDriver)*

The only places that Audi has really struggled big time at were Long Beach and Lime Rock. Even then, the #2 Audi lead a lot of the race at Long Beach and at Lime Rock, the #1 Audi was gaining on the leading Penske RS Spyder when it spun out/wrecked trying to avoid a slower LMP1 car.
At Houston, the #1 Audi had a 15 second lead when it had to pit due to a cut tire, and the nearly equal speed of the LMP2 cars, a run in with a GT2 Porsche, and a lack of caution flags didn't allow them to make up the track position lost quickly enough to get back the lead.
At Salt Lake City, the lack of cautions caused Audi to have to take longer to fill it's tank with enough fuel to be sure to make the finish, and Penske got lucky that Briscoe didn't run out at the end(it last 3 or so laps were 5-10 seconds slower that McNish's).
Maybe IMSA will open up the refueling restrictors if that is the problem(which I'm sceptical on), or maybe Audi could learn the tricks that Penske are using to save some time on their stops-Roger owns Indy Car and NASCAR teams, and that's where they're probably getting their advantage from.
And the advantages/disadvantages of the Audis and LMP2 cars aren't one liners either. But the Audi's big advantages are that it's lap times are more consistant over a race run and in traffic than the LMP2 cars. LMP2 cars, due to their lack of torque and power, get held up by GT2 cars, which corner as fast as their cars, GT1 cars, which corner as fast, slow down almost as fast, and are as fast or faster on straight aways, and the same goes for the non-Audi LMP1 cars.
The big advantage that the LMP2 have is that their ligher weight and smaller engines tend to use up less fuel in a given period than the Audi's. And the LMP2 can be slightly faster on a clean race track, and on hard compound tires on cold race tracks. The Audi's need warm tracks to have the advantage during the race. The LMP2s are also faster for the first few laps of a run.
But that's why the lost to the R8 at Lime Rock last year. The Porsche's times fell off badly after about 10 laps after a stop. Both the R8 and R10's times don't drop off that drastically or that quickly. 
The Porsche's win streak is due mostly to strategy/gambling/luck, and that they've figured out how to try to counter the drop off in times. But I have a feeling that Porsche's luck is about to run out. The Audis will be too fast at Road America and Mosport, as well as Road Atlanta, and with PLM being an endurance race, that's Audi territory, and with Laguna Seca being an endurance race(as well as Road America), the Porsche's will be hurting. And I don't think that they'll have Belle Isle all to themselves, as the Audi's ran extremely well at St. Petersburg and Houston, and did very well at Long Beach except for the last turn.
And next year, a minimum weight increase of 110 lbs for the LMP2s should almost eleminate them from being in position for overall wins except for street courses and Lime Rock and similar circuits if IMSA adopts that rules package.
But then again, if the Audi's got a little better fuel mileage, this wouldn't be an issue(through fuel tankage, or of their own doing, or maybe with the probably air restictor reduction for the diesels next year).


----------



## chernaudi (Oct 6, 2006)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (chernaudi)*

I know of a novel solution. Why not give the R10s a 85.5 liter fuel tank and the gas LMP1 cars a 94.5 liter fuel tank(splitting the 9 liter fuel tank reduction for the diesels). The LMP1 cars still would have equal range, and the LMP2 cars(resticted to 90 liters) can't use fuel mileage strategy to win the races overall anymore?
Granted, it isn't gonna happen, because Audi won't give up their chances to get an auto invite to Le Mans next year for winning PLM(the ACO frowns upon giving teams that run under IMSA tech waivers auto invites for whatever reason), and they know that the LMP2 cars may very well get racheted back next year. But it would seem to be a fair solution without making the LMP2s add 110 lbs of ballast to their cars next year.

_Modified by chernaudi at 2:56 PM 7-25-2007_


_Modified by chernaudi at 2:57 PM 7-25-2007_


----------



## heel_toe (Apr 27, 2007)

*Re: Audi Gets Some P1 Competition from Cytosport (R10_Telemetry)*


_Quote, originally posted by *R10_Telemetry* »_NSalvatore is amazingly correct on all points. Jimmy, despite the fact that you are sometimes standing right next to me in the Audi pits, you are still too far removed from intricacies of our situation. I can not convey all the findings of 70+ professionally degreed engineers here, since I neither have the time nor the legal ability to share this information. But rest assured that the dozen of people that pour over the data we collect at every race are well qualified to come to these conclusions. The chance that anyone could possibly come up with a better explanation based on anything but the facts of the data would be a trillion to one. This may sound very German, but logic must prevail here. When you're not busy shooting for Mazda at the next race, stop by our Engineering trailer and we can talk further.


It's nice to have someone from Audi answer some questions. Tell Marco not to apologise next time (like he did to Pirro after the race). He did an amazing job driving. It wasn't his fault the overall lead was lost...as we all seem to agree here.


----------

