Jump to content

Talk:24 Hours of Le Mans

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 110.175.228.227 (talk) at 03:55, 12 June 2013 (→‎Objective). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconSports Car Racing C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports Car Racing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sports Car Racing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconMotorsport C‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Motorsport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Motorsport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Archive

Archives


1

Discussion Page Archive

In order to improve the usefullness of the talk page, I have archived the previous talk page here [[1]]. I only archived material I felt was no longer in date. If you disagree with any of the changes, feel free to make changes of your own. DrMotley (talk) 14:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have added an actual archive, what you did was delete the content. --Falcadore (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aerodynamics and maximum speed on Mulsanne

The "1982–1993" section reads

In 1989 too a W.M.-Peugeot set up a new record speeding at 406 km/h (253 mph)

But the Innovations/Aerodynamics section does not seem to acknowledge this

During the 1988 race, the crew of a W.M. prototype taped over the engine openings and set a recorded speed of 404 km/h (251 mph) down the Mulsanne in a publicity stunt, although the car was almost undrivable elsewhere on the circuit and the engine was soon destroyed from a lack of cooling. However, for the 1989 event, the Mercedes-Benz C9 reached 399 km/h (248 mph) under qualifying conditions.

It seems to me that if Peugeot reached 406 km/h in 1989 under qualifying or race conditions then the Innovations/Aerodynamics section should reference this instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User5910 (talkcontribs) 20:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the back of mind mind both the Welter Peugeot and the Sauber C-9 were clocked at 405kph (+/- 3kph). But it was the Welter Peugeot that achieved the speed during the race while the Sauber Mercedes did during qualifying. So officially the speed record goes to Roger Dorchy (driver) and the Welter Racing WM-Peugeot. The Welter car was a very tiny car for reduced drag, it was not only very difficult to drive, but also the air intakes were partially taped over to improve aerodynamics and was retired early into the race with overheating problems. The Sauber Mercedes instead was a proper racecar competing for overall victory, but as it was turbocharged the drivers could increase the power output of the engine in qualifying to maximize speed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.202.141.61 (talk) 23:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

  • http://www.usgpindy.com/news/story.php?story_id=1417
    • In Graham Hill on 2011-03-22 11:20:36, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
    • In 24 Hours of Le Mans on 2011-06-19 05:37:52, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Index of thermal efficiency

This is not mentioned in the article. Fotoguzzi (talk) 00:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then mention it. --Falcadore (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References & Sourcing...again.

I have added the template for lack of references to the article. For an article of it's size and content there needs to be more than 13 references. Most of the material here is unreferenced, and the referenced material tends to be of a trivial nature. I can see from above that this subject was broached last year, but this needs another look. DrMotley (talk) 13:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TERS?

The article mentions "TERS" without a link or explanation. Does anybody know what it is?     SkyLined (talk) 21:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thermal Energy Recovery System also known as Waste Heat Regeneration. In many ways a standard turbocharged engine could be considered as a TERS unit as it uses the hot high energy gases from the engine to produce power. Bjmullan (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tnx. I've created a few redirects and added a little details to help people find this info.     SkyLined (talk) 23:49, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now I feel old

For the record, the Targa Florio was never run except as a rally. It was run on a closed course, but not as a circuit race, like Le Mans, with all cars starting at once. Krevlornswath of the Deathwok Clan I hate L.A. 02:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

huh... why are you talking about the Targa Florio on this talkpage? I can't follow you. Saschaporsche (talk) 07:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bexause of someone changing the first sentence of the article using it as justification. --Falcadore (talk) 07:40, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Objective

I'm sorry, but shouldn't the objective of the race, i.e. to get the maximum number of laps in 24 hours, be mentioned right at the top? After over half an hour of reading, I finally found this in the section "Classification". A bit long since that's all I wanted to know, don't you think?

Also, I don't think "Classification" is a good title for this section. The idea that being classified as a finisher is the main objective might be inferred by the reader, yet cannot be assumed. A title such as "Race Objective" would be more appropriate.

And more generally, the article seems not very well structured and slightly bloated. A bit too much like telling a story, to my mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.184.83 (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a motor race. THe objective is to win. Number of laps completed is secondary surely? --Falcadore (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. "Greater number of laps than the guy behind you" is a needless "clarification" & IMO a worthless add. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 02:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You'll find more than 1/2 the entrants enter the race with only the intention of finishing the full 24hrs. This is why you'll often see broken cars sitting in their garage with the door open for hours, only to limp around pathetically on the last few laps. It's not like NASCAR or FIA go-karts. Since Nürenburg stopped running sportscars, it's arguably (paris-dakar rally) the toughest race in the world and simply finishing it is a worthy acheivement.
For those at the top, the actual results are determined by distance, not being 1st or the number of laps. It doesn't normally matter, but there was an example in the 1960s where one car won, despite being just behind another because it started the race 24hrs before near the back of the field. I believe it was ruled as having travelled 20m further. I'm not going to bother finding a reference or amend this, as everything I've contributed to this article has been deleted. You're welcome to though, if you're interested. It was pretty funny how confused everyone was. 14:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.228.227 (talk)
That came about because a team attempt to stage a tied finish and officials made an adjudication to get themselves out of the dilemma. It was exceptional circumstances and not any indication of policy of running a race differently from any other motor race. I don't believe you can build a case based on a one-off exception because one team was attempting to be clever. --Falcadore (talk) 18:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You undoubtedly have a better memory than I do, and if you can figure out what this means: http://www.24h-lemans.com/wpphpFichiers/1/1/ressources/Pdf/2013/24-heures-du-mans/regulations/2013-fia-wec-sporting-regulations.pdf (page 60, 84 1.1) then you're greater than me, sir. It specifically states 'greatest distance' and then technically but uselessly contradicts itself in later rules. And is that a remnant of this adjudication there with the grid position bit? :) I know barely enough french to figure out that the english translation is flat out wrong in some cases, and not brilliant in general, but anyone know the official french well?
Above all, it makes exactly no difference, now they have all that in, but the spirit of the race has always been about distance over time (as all endurance races are) and I find it more than a little dissapointing to see it described here like a sprint race. Meh. 01:51, 12 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.228.227 (talk)
"if you can figure out what this means" It means exactly what it says, & what's said above: the guy who wins covers the most distance in 24h. If you mean "ignoring grid position", that's because the guy starting 20th is farther from the starting line than the guy starting 2d, so the "distance covered" is line to line, not grid box to grid box. It's not contradicted, either, AFAICT. (Did you have a particular point you think does?) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 02:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rule 84 2.1 Do try to keep up.

Introduction

At six paragraphs the introduction before the table of contents is too long. It should be more brief and it may hinder readers' interest and understanding of the topic, as it did for me. Can some capable people trim and enhance the article please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CyberdyneT850Model101 (talkcontribs) 14:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commons categories needing cleanup

Hi, I don't know if this is the right place to mention this problem, but Commons:Category:24 Hours of Le Mans by year needs some attention. Its subcategories (especially the ones of races in the 20th century) contain many files showing objects that don't match with the (Le Mans race) categories they are categorized in. For example the files are showing Le Mans racecars which are not racing in the specific Le Mans races (maybe racing in another race, for exampe this Ferrari Dino 166P that is racing at 1000 km Nürburgring), but due to the categorization it appears as if they do so. This categorization system is causing following problems:

  • To be consequent you would have to add files of racecars to categories of all races in that these cars have ever participated (Why only 24 Hours of Le Mans?). Then the number of categories in that one file is categorized in would dramatically increase.
  • Categories of specific races lose their sense if files are included that have no relation to the topic of the category. So you will not know which files really show scenes of the specific race.

In addition you will also find files showing objects that lack any relation to 24 Hours of Le Mans races. For example they are showing cars that look somehow similar to cars that have participated in the specific Le Mans races, but they have obviously never done it themselves (for exampe this Renault 4CV).

In my opinion Commons:Category:24 Hours of Le Mans by year would be more scientific and make searches for files easier if they contain only files that match with the topics of these categories. Do you see the point and is anybody ready to clean up? --217.227.98.52 (talk) 14:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rename section: "Since 2006" to "2006-2013"

I would like to suggest renaming the section "Since 2006" to "2006-2013". Not right now, but probably upon the conclusion of the 2013 or 2014 race.

With major regulation changes expected for 2014, I feel it may be a good point in time to create a new section, with "Since 2014"

Gojet-64 (talk) 08:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Expected? Sounds like speculation to me. Confirm that there will be first. --Falcadore (talk) 11:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
They are expected and already somewhat announced. Plans for rule changes in 2014 have been known since about 2011. I don't have a source off hand but it's something fairly well known. Required hybrid systems for factory teams, possible elimination of privateers in LMP1, various other things. Audi is already developing an entirely new 2014 car and Porsche is entering at the same time as well due to the known rule changes. The359 (Talk) 19:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the major regulation changes include:

  • All cars must be closed-cockpit
  • Significantly higher engine freedom
  • Changes regarding hybrid systems and fuel use

Sources: [2] [3] Gojet-64 (talk) 00:10, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]