Talk:24 Hours of Le Mans

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)

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 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

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)

Index of thermal efficiency

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

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

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)

TERS?

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

Bexause of someone changing the first sentence of the article using it as justification. --Falcadore (talk) 07:40, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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?