Back? I see it as a step forward. Large capacity, NA engines are decades old technology. The future is integration of the electric drive train, it's light, efficient, high pressure, low capacity engines.
F1 2013 - The begining of the end
- Thread starter Skeeter
- Start date
Such pish, because the 1.6 litre turbos we have produce 600HP now don't they
Making high power reliably from a small engine is not actually that hard really
We are talking about an engine that is probably sub 400HP in NA trim, which after a play around with some numbers while challenging is not impossible (325hp at 10k RPM from a 1.6L NA is actually not that hard)
Would make ~250NM of torque in NA trim
Last edited:
Ground Effects have been talked about for the new IndyCar series but I think they bottled it and went for the safe bet (i.e. very similar to the current car) plans for 2012 onwards.
I fully support electric motors and KERS and the like, but not in F1. KERS has the fantastic ablility to add touch of a button power, and increased range. Both of these are ideal for GT racing and Endurance racing, and are being used (see Porsche 911 GT3R Hybrid for the perfect example of how to use KERS). These series also make a lot more sence as the cars have a direct relevance to the road going cars the companies sell.
F1 has never had this, ever. Even when it was full of manufacturers it was advertising though association. No Joe Blogs could walk down the shop and buy an F1 derived component that they had seen on TV yesterday. Yes, aspects of F1 are now in our road cars, but its not like your going to see 600BHP twin turbo 1.6l engines in a Ferrari road car any time soon...
HOWEVER, this kind of thing does make sence if you encorage competition. Look at tyres. When there were a number of manufacturers is was in the companies interest to build the best F1 tyres. You didnt then go and stick the same ones on your Mondeo, but the brand was strenthend.
Trouble is, this isnt going to work this time round. The specification is so tight that everyone will produce the same engine to the same specification, and then it will be frozen for 5 years. Why would any car maker want to get involved in that? As a lot of guys on here are saying, they need to be specified as "1.6l, X mpg, go!" and let the manufacturers go for it. But the trouble is the FIA have openly stated that they dont want anyone to gain an advantage, which basically means they want everyone equal.
The result? A single spec series that tries to con us all into thinking its not because all the identical components have different car maker badges on them. And that is not F1.
And also, I bet most of the people on here who say the sound of an F1 car isnt important havent heard 24 of them screaming at 18,000 rpm through the Belgian forests. The sound is one of the reasons to go to a race rather than watch it at home. Its simply sublime.
They have been limited for years and no oe is complaining much about the last few years in relation to competitive championships.
That argument is flawed because teams and companies cannot afford to have an open restriction series where they are constantly testing. Even when the restrictions were less the racing wasn't any better and all the big companies and sponsors didn't join.
Little of it has any bearing on anything off track anyway. Why would they want to spend billions on aero.
Only thing I don't want to lose is the sound.
Whilst that's true, we've already had turbo cars in the past, F1 moved on for certain reasons, that's all I mean by that.
Soldato
I meant the 1.6 in a ford focus road car...
BBC said:
If their use is increasing dramatically anyway, why do F1 cars have to pretend to join in to help?
Soldato
In terms of racing, it really doesn't matter. F1 today is all about aero, the engine is not a dominant factor.
What?! Not a dominant factor? How can you conclude that?
Caporegime
Lets replace the accelerator and brake with bike pedals then.
Again not that hard if you design the engine properly
1.6 NA can easily make 200HP with an 8k redline
Change it to 9k and you can make 240HP easily.
Now add boost to the 8k engine, keeping the redline at 8k ... you are talking about an easy 350+hp on a road engine.
Caporegime
Like I'm sure suggestions to the FIA went, my post has been completely ignored so I'll ask again.
Why not just limit the amount of co2 engines can produce? Surely getting most power with least emissions would be way more beneficial from an engineering point of view?
Why not just limit the amount of co2 engines can produce? Surely getting most power with least emissions would be way more beneficial from an engineering point of view?
Of course they can they have a 100m+ to spend how they see fit, new sponsors would join, and you had just as many teams in teh late 80's early 90's with sponsors.
That's the whole point they don;t. It gains the sponsors nothing apart sponsorship. You would save millions from aero development as it would be pointless spending it on aero which might give you 0.005 per lap, when you can spend the same on kers and might get 0.2 advantage per lap.
Introduce things like unrestricted kers/engines and new sponsors will sign up as it has real world applications and is a very sport over commodity and is being hugely invested in the real world.
Just like back in the day many driver aids came from f1, it was the test bed and research lab, with real world goods being invented/perfected.
bit silly going after co2, how do you measure it, as I said with no refuelling you can just limit fuel tank sizes and keep reducing it periodically.
Last edited:
Soldato
Sorry, I meant factory spec, yes a 1.6 can be powerful, Pikes Peak Escudo, earlier era turbo F1 cars etc, we've seen them, but I meant the 1.6 turbos WE'LL be driving, will be far far far from what the heros on TV have, so to that end, just leave them going for whatever engines they want.
Man of Honour
The BMW engines in the 83-88 Brabhams, Arrows and Benettons used the blocks from used BMW 1500 saloons. They ran 900+bhp in race trim and over 1300bhp (1500 is rumoured) in hand grenade qually trim.
Again, the only reason the engines are not making that sort of power is due to companies saving a bit of money on design and manufacturing (of not only the engines, but other components in the car).
You can reliably make large power with road engines ... you just need to design them correctly, design other parts of the car correctly, have good manufacturing abilities with tight tollerance for some parts, etc
The other factor is costs for some of the crazier designs, such as those that have turbines directly driving the crank.
Soldato
F1 is better when the cars have no electronics and are just simple engineering far more exiting to watch. Now u can't even overtake with the modern cars how stupid is that.
electronics have nothing to do with that. It is aerodynamics and restrictions.
More down force, better tyres and less engine power. means it's harder to spin the wheels up and get it completely wrong, larger aero means it's harder to follow closely etc. It also means many corners are now flat out,just not enough BHP compared to grip.
Until they sort out dirty air the key component isn't improved. I don't want to see overtaking because someone pressed a button or opened a flap or even covered a hole. I want to see it because the car can follow behind through a corner and then slipstream past rather than having to stay half a second behind.
Haven't they been limiting the cars for years now? But due to the technological advancement F1 cars are still very fast or even faster even though the cars have less power than in the past.
Only time will tell but I think F1 will still be very popular no matter what changes are made, if something won't work then it'll be for one year only and then they will change something again.
Only time will tell but I think F1 will still be very popular no matter what changes are made, if something won't work then it'll be for one year only and then they will change something again.