Taking the fight to Audi and Toyota was a daunting task and would require something special. “For me, it was clear,” says Hitzinger. “I had to be very aggressive on the concept, because we had a lot of catching up to do compared to Audi who had been established for over a decade. We had to come with something radically new in order to make that change. That’s an approach that comes with its own risks.” Being tasked with returning Porsche to Le Mans and challenging for overall wins must rank up there with the most stressful jobs in racing, short of being Ferrari team principal.
Hitzinger was acutely aware of this.”The pressure was incredibly high, right? I mean, they were always coming back with that track record, we have to win, we’ll have to win fairly quickly. And that was a huge challenge. On one side, we started basically from scratch. And on the other side, you have this massive expectation.”
The sheer task of building a team to fight at the sharp end of sports cars should not be underestimated. It was not simply a case of hiring the engineers and other personnel, the right structures had to be established to ensure they all gelled together. The engineering and design processes also need to be schemed and implemented, to make the development and racing of a highly complex race car run as smoothly as possible. Luckily for Porsche, the end result – while far from perfect – was a potent machine.
Challenging Audi and Toyota
The 2012 onwards LMP1 era was the pinnacle of technical advancement in sports car racing. Though the current Hypercars look shiny and fast, they are technologically restrained race cars by comparison. Governed by rules that would eventually become the sometimes confusing and always controversial Equivalence of Technology regulations, the class sought to create a level playing field for different powertrain and fuel choices, without artificially balancing the overall performance of the cars. The idea being that whether petrol or diesel was used, and regardless of hybrid system choice, there would be no inherent disadvantage to picking one route over another.
The result was frankly, wonderful. Audi continued to refine its diesel-kinetic flywheel powertrains, Toyota arrived in 2012 with an NA petrol V8 and supercapacitor-based hybrid, then Porsche in 2014 appeared with its left-field gasoline V4 harnessing both kinetic and exhaust gas energy recovery.
Porsche 919 attempts to win on debut at Le Mans in 2014
Getty Images
In some respects, Porsche’s powertrain approach was the most unusual of the three manufacturers. At the heart of the 919 was a 2.0 litre direct injection V4 petrol engine, boosted with a single turbocharger. The output was augmented by two energy recovery systems, a front mounted motor and an exhaust driven generator. Porsche initially opted to run in the 6MJ energy recovery class(equating to filling an approximately 1.7kWh battery over each lap of Le Mans). Audi was in the 4MJ class while Toyota matched Porsche at 6MJ.
Speaking at the 2014 24 hour race, Hitzinger explained why the company opted for such a configuration. “The turbocharged engine is very efficient in combination with direct injection, we followed the downsizing concept because it is compact and light. We went for a vee configuration because it is compact and stiff, if we went for an inline four, we could not achieve what we wanted. The choice was then between a four or six-cylinder, and it was a matter of picking the best compromise. We wanted a certain dynamic efficiency as well as a particular ratio between bore diameter and combustion chamber volume, which in turn led us towards a bigger bore diameter. Hence the choice of a vee four.”
Recalling the early days of the project, Hitzinger suggests that though the V4 was certainly unique, it was not in his opinion the technological highlight. “The biggest innovation was actually the hybrid system and the battery concept, we were able to go early on to the very large hybrid system where Audi has a very small one, that was a performance benefit.”