F1 2014 regs

Meh. Rules sound interesting but if they really want to spark innovative, fuel efficient designs then they need to have freedom in how the engines are designed. Going on what current F1 is like, the engine design rules will be very strict in order to stop the good teams being waaaaaaaaaaay faster than the crap teams. However this stifles creativity, clever and innovative designs and unique solutions.

I still think they should say 6 cylinders in a 90 degree V, 1.6 litres, steel engine block, give all teams the same turbo and say you are allowed 100 litres of fuel for the race (perhaps the following year dropping to just 95 litres per race). The rest is up to you. This would create some extremely clever designs that really save fuel.
 
Last edited:
Totally agree and they don't want that. They are going to make sure the engines are all basically the same power and everything else.
 
Looks interesting, I know some trucks use something similar to a turbo to recover more energy from the exhaust, rather than compressing the intake air like a standard turbo it connects to the transmission (not sure what it's called). Is the energy recovery referring to something similar? Or perhaps a something using the thermoelectric effect to charge the batteries.
 
From a technological point of view it would be interesting to have a year with no restraints on engine size/power and aerodynamics, probably one team would end up dominating though.
 
jak731 said:
From a technological point of view it would be interesting to have a year with no restraints on engine size/power and aerodynamics, probably one team would end up dominating though.
Click to expand...

True, but right now they are spending millions on a new wing that makes 0.2 seconds a lap difference. The money would be far better spent elsewhere on the car imo, but they have no choice but to do this due to the rules.
 
Slam62 said:
am I a new follower? yeah well this was the first GP I attended:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_British_Grand_Prix

I've probably missed one or two races on the TV since...

electric cars down the pitlane, 15000 rpm your avin a laff incha

technology to make cars go faster and be louder, not save the planet, let the tree huggers do that.
Click to expand...

Ah, so you will remember the 1980 Williams winning that race with an engine that reved to.... 11,000

:rolleyes:
 
AcidHell2 said:
:confused:
What, have you gone mad? Or are you a new follower. F1 is all about research and innovation. In rcent years more innovation than research.
Click to expand...

mate????? seriously, its bloody racing, the point of it was to put world class drivers to the ultimate test, loud bad ass cars travelling at 220 mph, thats what we want, not the crap research project..........we want some proper cars, v12's or v10's 3.6L reving over 22,000.............THE WORLD OF F1 IS being slowly destroyed. sombody please go and kick the living **** out of bernie........sombody.



no screaming + no speed = NO F1.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hn4EwTz9So&feature=related

ITS A BLOODY MOTOR RACE!!!!!!!!!!!


il tell you somthing, if i had anypower in f1 id make it like this. Yes i agree we should be keeping as enviromently friendly as possible but come on.......surely this is taking it a little toooooooooo............ far.
 
Last edited:
And all the sponsors want to be seen to be green, so who's going to fund f1?
Surly you want fastest and in the near future that will be electric.

As guy on f1fanatic says

Red Andy said:
Got to love all the Luddites coming out in the comments here.
Like it or not, F1 has to improve its green credentials in order to survive. Yes, we all know that the carbon emissions of the cars themselves are dwarfed by the carbon cost of moving the F1 circus around the world every year. And we all know that the total carbon footprint of F1 is probably less than a sport like football, with all those spectators driving to all those games every weekend.
But it’s all about sponsorship revenue, which in turn is all about image. Some fans might like gas-guzzling V10s and V12s, but any potential advertiser that is trying to improve its green credentials won’t.
On the other hand, most fans probably don’t care about carbon footprints one way or the other. All they want to see is good racing – and I’ve seen nothing that suggests that these rule changes will harm that.
Click to expand...

Well I slightly disagree, with DRS harming the racing, But rest of the rules won't harm racing at all.
 
Last edited:
hmmm... in car ignition.. are we seeing a move towards.. "Gentlemen... start.. your... engines!"

That said, there are a couple of thing I'd not mind seeing come over from nascar, specifically the much more open radio chatter and the use of hybrid fuels
 
Kerming said:
mate????? seriously, its bloody racing, the point of it was to put world class drivers to the ultimate test, loud bad ass cars travelling at 220 mph, thats what we want, not the crap research project..........we want some proper cars, v12's or v10's 3.6L reving over 22,000.............THE WORLD OF F1 IS being slowly destroyed. sombody please go and kick the living **** out of Bernie.

no screaming + no speed = NO F1.


ITS A BLOODY MOTOR RACE!!!!!!!!!!!

YouTube Nigel Mansell qualifying brands hatch, those cars were mental.


il tell you somthing, if i had anypower in f1 id make it like this. Yes i agree we should be keeping as enviromently friendly as possible but come on.......surely this is taking it a little toooooooooo............ far.
Click to expand...

I beg to differ, the most powerful and IMO some of the best sounding (bar Ferrari V12s/some V10s) were the V6 turbos of the 80s there was even a 4pot 1.5 knocking out 1500bhp.
 
I'd like to see DRS gone (or at least a few races without it) - I think with the Pirelli's and the diffuser gone, it's not needed.

I'm interested by the locked gear settings for the season. That's likely to make the difference in relative car position on different tracks much, much greater since which car has the best gear ratios will shift as we move between tracks.

Is that going to be a good thing? Probably, but I'm not sure. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
 
MeEsH BaKkA said:
Has anyone actualy bothered to read the technical regs?

There are no changes to the transmission rules.
Click to expand...

9.6 Gear ratios :
9.6.1 The number of forward gear ratios must be 8.
9.6.2 Each competitor must nominate the forward gear ratios (calculated from engine crankshaft to
drive shafts) to be employed within their gearbox. These nominations must be declared to the
FIA technical delegate at or before the first Event of the Championship. For 2014 only, a
competitor may re-nominate these ratios once within the Championship season, in which case
the original nomination becomes immediately void. Ratio re-nominations must be declared as
a set and may only be effected by the substitution of change gears.
9.6.3 No forward gear ratio pair may be :
- Less than 12mm wide when measured across the gear tooth at the root diameter or any
point 1mm above or below the root diameter. Above this area each side of the gear
teeth may be chamfered by a maximum of 10°. In addition, a chamfer or radius not
exceeding 2.0mm may be applied to the sides and the tip of the teeth.
- Less than 85mm between centres.
- Less than 600g in weight (excluding any integral shaft or collar). If an integral shaft or
collar is to be excluded the mass of this may be shown by calculation assuming the gear
to be 12mm wide and the shaft geometry to be the same as that where slide on gears
are used.
9.6.4 Gear ratios must be made from steel.
9.6.5 Continuously variable transmission systems are not permitted to transmit the power of the
power unit defined in Article 5.1.
9.7 Reverse gear :
All cars must be able to be driven in reverse by the driver at any time during the Event.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom