Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Lotus bringing out another red flag. Which car is actually going to win though, Red Bull or Lotus....... most red flags in testing. Overall and per test.
F1 Testing 2014: Week 3 Bahrain
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
I think the opposite (as do some pundits) - Button's smooth style will surely be a great asset in controlling the extra torque. Look how consistently well he performs in the wet.
The FIA did try to make F1 use production engines, at least in spec, when they introduced the 1.6 inline 4 cylinder turbo. There would have been direct marketing available to nearly all main stream car markers. Alas Ferrari and Mercedes put pay to that.
I'm with you, I like the technology race in F1. But if I sit in that camp I can't then complain if one team produces a car substantially quicker than the others.
Maybe there is a middle ground? Performance balance like GT3 does? Give the engine manufacturers some fuel and power unit dimensions and mounting points (so a team could use any engine), then let them build whatever? Then once its done the FIA tweek the ECU to ensure parity. And if someone runs off with it during the year they can pair them back? Sort of like the BTCC way. Its not fully open development, but it allows progress without letting one make get ahead. You would see engines improve in areas of economy, efficiency and weight, rather than power output, which is kind of where the ERS technology needs development focused anyway?
Just a thought.
I wondered about making the teams publish technical data post-race, or after the next race, or something so that while one team could develop ahead they'd not be able to keep a lid on how they did it and research costs would be slashed for the lower order teams.
I doubt we'll get to know that until Saturday in Melbourne.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Quite a few cars out for the end of the day, Hamilton goes fastest quite comfortably. I think for all William's good times in the past few days they've been doing pretty low fuel runs while Merc may have only done the one low fuel time with Rosberg last test. Though Hamilton's 1:33 might be low fuel also, just have a feeling Merc have a little more in the tank.
Also seems to be in general talk about problems for Merc, but ultimately they've run the engine maybe longer than anyone else(unclear if Williams have used one engine all test or switched out earlier). Finally killing an engine after 6 days of testing and what a dozen race distances maybe, is a good thing to happen and probably things like data from engine gives them a good idea of how much life is left in the engine at any point which could prove invaluable this season. Same with gearbox, both appear to be failures from long use and WAY beyond what is required of them which is actually great news. The engine is certainly that case, gearbox could have been a fault but who knows.
I can't really get around how Caterham can be getting so many laps and Red Bull/Lotus not. They both dwarf them in resources and staff, likely staff talent on top of that. Outside of huge amount of cooling what other positive do Caterham have over the other two? Surely it points to the Renault running fine with more cooling?
Also seems to be in general talk about problems for Merc, but ultimately they've run the engine maybe longer than anyone else(unclear if Williams have used one engine all test or switched out earlier). Finally killing an engine after 6 days of testing and what a dozen race distances maybe, is a good thing to happen and probably things like data from engine gives them a good idea of how much life is left in the engine at any point which could prove invaluable this season. Same with gearbox, both appear to be failures from long use and WAY beyond what is required of them which is actually great news. The engine is certainly that case, gearbox could have been a fault but who knows.
I can't really get around how Caterham can be getting so many laps and Red Bull/Lotus not. They both dwarf them in resources and staff, likely staff talent on top of that. Outside of huge amount of cooling what other positive do Caterham have over the other two? Surely it points to the Renault running fine with more cooling?
Based on mechanical grip then I would agree with you, but how many production cars are based so predominantly on aero like F1 cars?
I would doubt its very many at all - if any.
The Aero bias is what really gets me. The FIA want to improve the show yet keep this obvious bias.
hmm maybe Im losing the plot - but whats the point of getting manufacturers to invest £100's of millions in development if the FIA is only going to balance it out with the ECU in any case? (admittedly manufacturers make some money back with customer engine supply, but Im guessing the manufacturer still loses out substantially).
If they were production engines then yes the costs should be negligable and it wouldnt be so bad.
REALLY not trying to nitpick - but IS there a difference between economy and efficiency? I honestly cant think of a differentiator between these two. Weight changes of course would help either /both , and I think as you were pointing out the weight of the batteries especially (for the same charge) will improve/get less in the next few years as a matter of course.
While there is a massive time increase in the current regs, I presume the power output of the two versions of ERS (given that one didnt exist before this season) hasnt changed - I dont recall seeing any power output figures for these ERS versions.
Totally agree thats where focus needs to go in regards to the new regs .
To be clear, in that comment economy would be fuel usage, efficiency would be the complete package of how well energy is recovered into the ERS from the V6.
My point would be that the drive would be to make the engines smaller, lighter, and more efficent, therefore requring less fuel and smaller more powerful batteries. Rather than simply making them more powerful.
What are you referring to in terms of ERS power output? KERS (2009 - 2013) was an 60KW motor that could be fed with 400MJ of energy per lap. The 2014 ERS is 2 motor system with the MGUK a 120KW motor that can be fed with 4KJ of energy per lap, and the MGUH completely unrestricted in terms of energy input and output. The capacity and maximum output per lap of the ERS is limited.
My point would be that the drive would be to make the engines smaller, lighter, and more efficent, therefore requring less fuel and smaller more powerful batteries. Rather than simply making them more powerful.
What are you referring to in terms of ERS power output? KERS (2009 - 2013) was an 60KW motor that could be fed with 400MJ of energy per lap. The 2014 ERS is 2 motor system with the MGUK a 120KW motor that can be fed with 4KJ of energy per lap, and the MGUH completely unrestricted in terms of energy input and output. The capacity and maximum output per lap of the ERS is limited.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 10,140
- Location
- Europe
The old F1 engines were more economical than a Prius, or so said Martin Witmarsh. Obviously all the aero takes a massive toll on MPG. Not to mention the fact that they are actually racing.
The new power units are more powerful than the ICE engines used last season, and the cars have less downforce and drag (DRS slot is bigger).
The new power units are more powerful than the ICE engines used last season, and the cars have less downforce and drag (DRS slot is bigger).