At long last I have completed my 2019 Le Mans review! After using my normal process to manipulate the results, primarily for the Amateur driver comparisons, the ambient conditions and their impact on performance looked like it was muddying up the results. How can I compare a driver who spent more time in the car in the heat of the day with one who did their bulk of the time in the cold night hours?





To try and help with this I decided to break the race duration up into time blocks similar to what I did for the recent snow race at Spa (to split wet and dry running). In theory this should be able to discretise stints into more similar ambient conditions, allowing for a more direct comparison. These lines in the sand were chosen to be the following:

Time Block Name Time Window Day 1 Race Start to 10pm Night 10pm to 6am Happy Hour(s) 6am to 8am Day 2 8am to Race Finish





It should be said that every comparison made isn’t like for like. It is impossible to compare the drivers exactly, the track is always changing, wind directions are transient, however this can give a guide and maybe illustrate further than what one can see with a live feed of the race, and if you’re lucky, some live timing that’s helpful for a change!





The following ramblings will cover all the classes, full to the brim with talented drivers and cars with speed. The peak performance of each chassis will be reviewed to touch on BoP and EoT (only Pro driver data used in Pro-Am classes) alongside the Amateur driver comparisons as normal. Time spent in the pit lane is also critical in endurance racing, so this will be touched upon in addition.

LMP1

For this class I will be reviewing the EoT (Equivalence of Technology) between the Toyota TS050s and the rest of the class lacking the complex hybrid systems. Running up to this race, the EoT changed since the previous race (Total 6H of Spa) in the following ways: Toyotas were 16kg down on weight, Gibson powered cars had 50.8kg of fuel per stint (down from 56.5) and AERs got 48.4kg per stint (down from 52.8). Le Mans has such a unique circuit layout, and so an EoT change is expected.





I did not notice any developments on the LMP1s for this race compared to the Test Day. Rebellion opted for the brand-new low drag front end they avoided at Spa.





EoT/Car Pace Comparison

By considering the fastest times set over the whole race we can get a broad picture of where the class is at and what each chassis can do. With some of the fastest times being set after some had retired however, I will use the first portion of the race before the attrition started digging in.









Toyota again were the fastest team with the fastest car, however in traffic (after the first few traffic-free fastest laps were complete) both lead Privateer teams (Rebellion and SMP) were around a second off the pace. Pretty good considering the rest of the season! With a more aggressive EoT and a pair of rapid Ginetta G60 AERs replacing the BR1s I hope this gap will reduce on track. The number 8 Toyota took it relatively easy and not a good representation of what the TS050 could do.





At the start of the Superseason, few would have expected that the young relatively inexperienced Rebellion would be showing up the superstars in the #1, but through the season and this race, they impressed. Both SMP lap times were closely matched all race, leading me to believe they are close to the upper edge of what that car can do. Unfortunately, the Dragonspeed BR1 Gibson and Bykolles Enso Gibson were both well off the pace; paired with poor reliability, they were rather anonymous.









Interestingly with the Privateers pushing more than the Hybrids when the track conditions were quick (Happy Hour in the morning etc) most of the top laps from the #3 Rebellion R13 were faster than the overall winner, the #8 Toyota. It shows how rapid these petrol-only machines can be in race trim, especially when compared in context with factory machinery in the last decade, before and even including Hybrid machinery!

Comparing ‘ideal lap’ by summing the best sectors measured, the #3 was the fastest Privateer with 3:18.1 almost 8 tenths faster than the #11’s ideal lap.

Top Speed

Privateers have been historically the fastest through the speed trap all season as the Hybrid machinery lifts and coasts to save energy. SMP also showed their speed breaking the speed record in WEC history. The up-rated AER V6 is providing good power, and the low drag aero kit is slippery compared to the Oreca developed Rebellion R13. This allowed the BR1 to pass easier on the Mulsanne straights. For reference a top speed measured in the race by the faster #7 Toyota was 334.9 kph. With this considered, it’s clear to see the Oreca is the better platform in corners compared to the low drag/low downforce aero to overhaul the lower top speed.





SMP vs Rebellion for the highest top speed during the race

LMP1 Pit Stops

Within the Equivalence of Technology, Toyota also had an advantage in the pit lane. Thanks to their far superior efficiency they use less fuel. This is reflected in the time to refuel being shorter, even though the non-hybrids have a higher refuelling flow rate. They also had a stint length 1 lap advantage from the EoT to reflect their efficiency, allowing for fewer stops over the race; less time spent stationary or slow in the pit lane results in more time at speed on track!









The graph above shows how much of an advantage Toyota had at the end of the race. There is also an argument that an advantage they had was not from EoT as well. It is expected that a factory effort will have a better crew in the pits.

Erasing this pit lane deficit would reduce the gap between the #11 SMP and the winner by 15 minutes (4.5 laps) to around 1.5 laps gap on track. With a more aggressive EoT against Toyota next season in the pits, we should see a much closer finish regardless of on track performances. On the other hand, such a remarkable development of efficiency should be rewarded; the hybrids are using roughly 45% less fuel than the Privateers, which is being reflected in the pits. The trouble is when this advantage in the pits is also stacked on top of the advantage the Hybrid technology yields on track. To have an advantage in the pits, should they have a disadvantage on track? Should the pits be equalised fully to show a visual advantage in pace on track?

LMP2

This class (despite being spec racing) is sensitive to several factors separate from the LMP1 prototype class. The chassis choice is the most obvious difference between cars, but also there is a choice of tyre between Dunlop and Michelin. An FIA Silver or lower rated driver is required per car, so the performance of this driver (pure pace and how easy they find speed from the car and tyres) can make or break your race. Across the minimum drive time at Le Mans, 1 seconds a lap slower is worth roughly nearly two minutes/half a lap total. Here is where teams gain and lose the least as you will see the margins are large driver to driver.

LMP2 Class-Wide Top Laps

First off, we look at the peak performance of the cars. There is an assumption here that with the top drivers are in the car, they are closest to getting the most performance out of it. Team to team though, the best of the respective crews is not equal. There might have been portions of the race with cars having slower Ams in as well reducing the time to set a fast lap, so thankfully there are several of the chassis and tyre combinations out there to get more representative pro driver data.

Day 1

The first portion of the race is shown below. I have trimmed away only the best entrants for each chassis and tyre combination as this class is very full of entries! The Aurus and Alpine entries are rebadged Oreca chassis and so are identical in every way.









Oreca chassis cars were shown to be the most competitive, with both tyre choices were closely matched at the top. Both the TDS (orange) and Signatech Alpine (blue) fought for the fastest laps at the start despite being on either side of the tyre war. The consistency of each Oreca tyre combo was similar too as you read up the chart.

The 29 Dallara was surprisingly good, especially when compared against other Oreca teams that are formidable in the FIA WEC – The entire top 30 set of laps beat both Jackie Chan DC Racing top laps. The Ligier Michelin United cars weren’t too far off other competitive teams at the start of the race, but still there remains a gap to the top of the class. There is a Rabbit and Hare analogy to ponder over however, as how many of these teams were pushing hard, and how many were saving themselves for the hard slog ahead?

Night





In the night portion of the race, a similar relationship was upheld. TDS and Signatech Alpine with the best consistency across the top portion of laps. Again, the Racing Team Nederland #29 Dallara was in the mix thanks to their two very fast professional drivers. This is especially surprising considering their change to Oreca for the next season; is this move scapegoating their poor results on the chassis even though it is competitive? Later on, we’ll look at the Am performance and see how that balances up with this

.





United Autosports has again a gap with the Michelin to the top of the class. This gulf in performance also prompted a move to the Oreca platform as the team (in partnership with Ligier) have changed chassis for their new fight in WEC.

The Ligier on Dunlop was poor; Panis Barthez are relatively new to the Dunlop tyre after being on Michelins for several years. There is an argument to be said that it is less fair to compare these traces to Oreca results, as there are more Oreca results to choose from. there were only a pair of Michelin shod Ligiers in the race, compared to 5 Orecas on the same rubber. Could a better team do more with this Ligier Dunlop combination?





Happy Hours

Daybreak at Le Mans is referred to as Happy Hour, a time where the air is cool allowing for good engine power and more downforce through higher density, track conditions are good, and the track is relatively empty after several retirements. This is when some of the best laps are posted, and for this reason I wanted to isolate it. I felt it would be unfair to compare a car that had their Am in at Happy Hour and one that had their fastest driver setting much faster times when comparing over the whole race or even a larger time window.





This is the shortest time block of the race, so is subject to effects of fewer laps to choose fast ones from and less time for a fast driver stint to fall within; this is reflected by a narrower top lap window on the plot X axis. It’s less of a clear descriptor but will still be considered.

The top teams in this block were Graff with their Oreca Michelin, the Signatech Alpine crew and the 30 Duqueine Oreca on Michelins. The best Dunlop car was the 26 Aurus GDrive crew. Even the Ligier Michelin of United Autosports did really well here on consistency (their 15th fastest lap was the best overall for example). Could this be a good operating window for the Michelin tyre compared to the Dunlop?

Day 2

The last window of time is shown below again trimmed to show the best of each chassis and tyre combinations.









The best cars here were the GDrive Aurus (Oreca) on Dunlops and the 37 Jackie Chan DC Racing Oreca also on Dunlops, a contrast to the previous time block. The IDEC Oreca was the best Michelin runner. The Dallara in the plot (the #29) had a lot of issues in the second half of the race, so this isn’t the best representation of peak performance. Unfortunately, there aren’t others competing at the top of the class to compare with.





Both Ligier combinations were again off the pace. Despite being competitive with other entries that have race winning pedigree in the world championship, they were still far from the pace at the top of the class for the majority of the race despite having accomplished drivers (especially in the case of United Autosports).

With the above considered, there is performance to be gained depending on chassis choice and how the tyres work with ambient conditions, but over 24-hour race things can even out. Hopefully Goodyear in Season 8 of WEC will be even tighter. Now let’s look back at how the Amateur drivers fared in their respective machinery, bearing in mind how their cars differ with the information above.

Amateur Driver Comparison

Race duration will be split as usual as some may have spent more time in better conditions than others. Alongside the challenges of driving at night for a less experienced driver, having experienced the chill before sunrise paired with the midday heat a few times this can be a big factor!

Day 1









Above shows the top lap times of amateur drivers in the class. Unfortunately for Miro Konopka It illustrates how he was almost holding up the GTE Pro train at the start of the race. It was a good strategy from the team however, as he could complete a chunk of his driver time with a relative lack of traffic to negotiate whilst the pros in the class fought each other. His times will be hidden by trimming the Y axis to better show the competitive times that are closer together.





The best Ams at the start of the race were Vincent Capillaire in the Oreca (Michelin), Gabriel Aubrey in the 37 JCDC Oreca (Dunlop) and Job Van Uitert in the GDrive Aurus (Dunlop). Get used to these names if they manage to stay as Silver rated in the future! Other notable mentions are for Pierre Ragues in the Duqueine Oreca taking from the reserve list no less, Pierre Thiriet in the Signatech Alpine and Roberto Gonzalez in the Dragonspeed Oreca.





Eagle eyed readers may have noticed the inclusion of Roman Rusinov on this list. I wanted to illustrate his performance as a Gold rated driver and how it compared to other Silvers, and more importantly the Silver he shares the car with.

The best performing Bronze rated drivers here were Francois Perrodo and Romano Ricci.

Day 2









Overnight both GDrive drivers had the best performances. Van Uitert was again at the top with good consistency. Aubry in the 38 had great pace too. David Heinemeier Hansson had his best performance at night, unfortunately it was all in vain thanks to a gearbox casing failure (a part teams are unable to repair). Note these are all Dunlop teams at the top of the class overnight; the conditions were probably better for the operating window of the Dunlop cold tyres.





Gonzalez (Oreca), Ragues (Oreca), Capillaire (Oreca) and Thiriet (Alpine) were the best Michelin runners. The United Autosports Ligiers were good at night too.

The best Bronzes at night were Roberto Lacorte (Dallara) and Romano Ricci (Ligier).

Happy Hours





In the morning hours, when conditions were fast, Dunlops were fastest again before the track heated up. Both Roman Rusinov and Job van Uitert were impressive, again the Dutchman being the better of the two. Gabriel Aubry also was impressive.





The best

Michelin by far happened to again be Vincent Capillaire in the Graff Oreca followed up by Ragues in the Duqueine despite his very limited laps in this period.

Both Bronzes in the Larbre Ligier were the best Bronzes.

Day 2

A lot of cars retired or weren’t pushing to bring it home, so this last phase isn’t the best window to compare within. In the run to the flag, Job van Uitert and Vincent Capillaire were pushing hard and clearly setting the fastest times. One argument for them being so far ahead is that both teams had to push to get a result; but then why was Roman Rusinov also in the 26 GDrive so far behind? A lot of cars retired or weren’t pushing to bring it home, so this last phase isn’t the best window to compare within. In the run to the flag, Job van Uitert and Vincent Capillaire were pushing hard and clearly setting the fastest times. One argument for them being so far ahead is that both teams had to push to get a result; but then why was Roman Rusinov also in the 26 GDrive so far behind?





Despite Ragues impressive performance alongside the rest of his teammates, the Duqueine Oreca had a suspension failure late. He was the third best driver – quite a strong entry considering it came from the reserves entry list.

Best Am Drivers