The LMP1 cars are almost as quick as the current F1 cars this year.
Fastest qualifying laps at Spa:
F1: 1:47.197
WEC: 1:54.767
Silverstone:
F1: 1:32.248
WEC: 1:39.721
Given the weight difference and the fact the LMP1 cars have to run for six hours and 24 at Le Mans, it makes a total mockery of the current generation of F1 cars and the whole "pinnacle of motorsport" rubbish. F1 cars should be an order of magnitude faster than this.
Does it?
7+ seconds a lap slower around Spa with an aero advantage and roughly 10-20% more power (hugely depending on the car though, it has to be said) and a roughly 250kg weight penalty (701Kg for an F1 car is with the driver, 870Kg for LMP1 is without).
Spa 2014 speed trap data has the LMP1 and F1 cars going at a similar speed through the traps (only a couple of km/h difference), so almost all of the difference is seemingly in cornering, which isn't what I would have expected, to be honest!
Spa 2015 F1 P1 time was 1:47.197. P20 was 1:53.099. So the LMP1 car's fastest lap wouldn't have got anywhere near the grid. The 107% time would have been 1:54.701, so the fastest LMP1 car would have had to appeal to the stewards to take part...
During the race, I suspect that the LMP1 cars would initially have a very slight advantage because I think their lap times are much more consistent whereas F1 cars generally tend to get faster and faster as the fuel burns off. After that, I'd expect the LMP1 cars to be at least a lap down by the end of the race.
Back in 1986, it is supposed that Toivonen would have been able to put his Lancia Delta S4 rally car in the top 10 for that year's F1 race around Estoril (based on his performance at a private test that year in prep for it being used as a stage in 1987). Many people crave the late-80s turbo-era F1, but was that the pinnacle when Group B rally cars could have competed much more closely than current LMP1 cars could today?
I suppose you have to ask yourself what sort of gap is "acceptable" and why those gaps exist. F1 cars definitely could be going enormously faster if the teams had limitless budgets, were allowed crazy aero (Lotus Type 79, Brabham BT46B etc), mile-wide super-sticky tyres, traction control, second brake pedals, no lower limits on weight, no limits on fuel efficiency etc etc but the sport would be unwatchable - nobody would be able to pass or even follow anyone because of the aerodynamics, it would basically be a case of whoever had the most money would win and keep on winning once they were in front. At least now, changes/reinterpretations of the regulations allow innovation to mix things up a little bit and the races are at least within touching distance of competitive in the dry, and genuinely exciting to watch in changeable or wet conditions.
It seems to me that what the sport needs is to actually be slower, not faster! Less mechanical grip seems to do a fabulous job of spicing up the racing. At the same time, that's at odds with the whole "pinnacle of motorsport" thing. Basically, I think we've reached the point at which the technology to go very much faster exists, but it isn't desirable to do so for sporting reasons or financial reasons, or both.
