Motorsport Off Topic Thread
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
You're absolutely right. For now, the cachet of your name being in F1 is enough of a draw. What happens when that runs out?
Very true, and it's pretty obvious that that's the case - otherwise the Merc unit wouldn't be so much better than the other three
But it's the energy recovery where the Merc is pulling ahead, not the actual engine at the heart of it. The FIA might as well have contracted someone to build a standard ICE and told the teams 'right, here's your engine, now go bolt energy recovery onto it'.Not '95, which had a mix of V8s, V10s and the Ferrari V12 on the grid. In fact, 1995 might have had one of the most diverse grids for engine models seen in F1:
Ford - EDB V8, EDC V8, EDD V8, EDM V8, ECA Zetec-R V8
Mugen-Honda V10
Hart V8
Peugeot V10
Renault V10
Yamaha V10
Ferrari V12
Mercedes V10
I believe the first season that V10s were mandated was 1998. So, a long time but not quite 20 years. I'm still failing to see why this is a Good Thing™?
Let's face it. If that Red Bull had been driven by Lewis Hamilton for those championship years instead of Vettel, then fans in this country wouldn't be complaining! And the driver must still count for a bunch otherwise the best car would win 1-2 every time.
F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport. If it's not, then what is it for? Being the pinnacle of motorsport means having the most advanced technology. And if you limit the teams with an overly-restrictive rulebook, then you no longer have the most advanced technology.
I want to see active suspension. Ground effect. Hyper-efficient engines. I want to see more tyre manufacturers get involved and start fighting each other to produce the best tyres. I want to see someone try and rock up with a futuristic gas turbine setup (like that Jaguar C-X75 concept from a while back). I want to see development.
I don't know if they've made a farce of it, but they certainly haven't made enough of it. And the BS about the (lack of) noise didn't help matters.
It already has once. The manufacturer era at the start of the 00's was funded on Marketing by Association. Once that started to wear thin all the car makers jumped ship.
Renault and Mercedes said they would be gone if F1 didn't change its engine aproach, and they were key in making the decision to use V6 turbos. They ahve then stuck about since, so you must assume that its more than just branding at the moment.
Mercedes have got parts they developed for the ditched I4 engines into their road cars already (I'd have to dig back through Evo magazines to remember what though), and both Ferrari and Mercedes are throwing hybrid tech at super cars. Renault I expect are struggling to find a use, as the I4 was far more up their street. But even while RBR are throwing them under the bus they are determined to stay, so surely theres got to be something in it for them above having their name on a car that isn't even winning?
Very true, and it's pretty obvious that that's the case - otherwise the Merc unit wouldn't be so much better than the other three
Would that be such a bad thing? The ERS rules are a bit of a mess however. They are open in the wrong places and restrictive in the wrong areas.
Not '95, which had a mix of V8s, V10s and the Ferrari V12 on the grid. In fact, 1995 might have had one of the most diverse grids for engine models seen in F1:
Ford - EDB V8, EDC V8, EDD V8, EDM V8, ECA Zetec-R V8
Mugen-Honda V10
Hart V8
Peugeot V10
Renault V10
Yamaha V10
Ferrari V12
Mercedes V10
I believe the first season that V10s were mandated was 1998. So, a long time but not quite 20 years. I'm still failing to see why this is a Good Thing™?
I was only 9 back in 1995 so I was struggling to remember
.I'm not suggesting its a good thing, I'm just saying that those people going "the V6s are rubbish as they are too restricive" are somewhat missing the point. They miss it even further when they then suggest a return to the basically spec V8's as an alternative
I dunno, there are plenty of people complainign that Hamilton only won last year because he was in the Mercedes. I think F1 just needs to accept that its never going to make everyone happy.
Has F1 ever been the pinnacle of motorsport? Its been heavily regulated to remove innovative technologies since forever. WEC (and its predecessors) have always been ahead in this area, hence the fact they are called Prototypes. F1 is more about the FIA picking a combination of rules to make a series with the fastest cars in it, more than promoting open development.
They started on the back foot frankly embarressed about it, let all the bad press overshaddow the good, and then refuse to admit they made the right call. As I keep saying, the biggest issue is the people, not the tech.
All that aside, how about this for a "1000bhp" Formula 1:
Same engines as now, same fuel flow and fuel limit, same ~650bhp ICE output, but the MGUK output is doubled from 160bhp to 320bhp, and the ES energy output per lap doubled from 4MJ to 8MJ and the recovery unrestricted entirely. Net result, 100kg per race, 100kg/per hour, highly efficient F1 race cars with ~970bhp.
Job done?
Works for me.
Should be easily doable too, as WEC already has an 8MJ class which Porsche run in.
Uses the current engines so no need to annoy the manufacturers or potentially incur further costs, same fuel amount so no need to back track on the FIA's "green" stance, and hits Bernies magical "1000bhp" number. Smiles all round.
I await the inevitable arguments against it based on something bizzare like viewer figures or noise...
Uses the current engines so no need to annoy the manufacturers or potentially incur further costs, same fuel amount so no need to back track on the FIA's "green" stance, and hits Bernies magical "1000bhp" number. Smiles all round.
I await the inevitable arguments against it based on something bizzare like viewer figures or noise...
Should be easily doable too, as WEC already has an 8MJ class which Porsche run in.
Uses the current engines so no need to annoy the manufacturers or potentially incur further costs, same fuel amount so no need to back track on the FIA's "green" stance, and hits Bernies magical "1000bhp" number. Smiles all round.
I await the inevitable arguments against it based on something bizzare like viewer figures or noise...
How about the fact that even with the current regulations they struggle to keep their batteries fully charged?
Over 1 lap, the current regs offer more than enough energy to harvest all the available energy...
I don't know why they're making such a big deal out of the 1000hp thing - Toto said they were already at 950hp and expect to reach 1000hp through development..
The regulations only allow 2MJ to be harvested from the MGUK per lap, but 4MJ can be releases back through it to provide drive. There's a 2MJ gap that has to be filled by harvesting from the MGUH, and this is where the struggle is. Removing the restriction on harvesting through the MGUK would solve that and then some. Porsche use unrestricted MGUKs and an MGUH to easily harveat 8MJ per lap.
The 1000bhp figure is bizzare now its not part of a plan to use different engines, I agree.
The 1000bhp figure is bizzare now its not part of a plan to use different engines, I agree.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 6,243
- Location
- North of Watford Gap
FOM should look into doing something to capture the true the sound on TV first. The cars sound stunning in amateur footage in testing, but somehow FOM manage to lose all of the weird noises on a GP weekend.
Is it? How different are the engines really going to sound if they just rev to 14k rather than 12k?
Yep. The whistles, chirps, barks and whooshes are great IRL, especially if you view from a braking zone. The engines also sound completely different to each other.
I think the 1000bhp is just a 'headline figure' to help bring new viewers into the sport. 1000bhp sounds 'cool and awesome' and hey look, it's also hybrid!
I really don't think it's much more than that although I suppose it will help that it's also more than any other motorsport (isn't it? apart from drag racing I suppose).
(I can imagine I'll be spectacularly wrong and JRS will come and *buzz* me back into reality)
I really don't think it's much more than that although I suppose it will help that it's also more than any other motorsport (isn't it? apart from drag racing I suppose).
(I can imagine I'll be spectacularly wrong and JRS will come and *buzz* me back into reality)
No I think your spot on that its now just about a big headline figure. The problem is that they should be making the fact its a hybrid the headline, but they aren't.
As for 1000bhp+ series, WEC is well over that at the sharp end. WEC cars were lapping Silverstone at around Q2 F1 pace, with cars that weigh twice as much as F1 cars!
As for 1000bhp+ series, WEC is well over that at the sharp end. WEC cars were lapping Silverstone at around Q2 F1 pace, with cars that weigh twice as much as F1 cars!
Quotes from Bernie, Toto et al. certainly suggest so, won't go hunting for sources as I'm sure they'll repeat themselves in the near future.
What the proposed higher fuel flow limit will be and resulting RPM it occurs at no one knows right now.
I agree, audio feed does a dire job of picking up trackside sound currently.
Sounds like a rather missguided angle to me then? Go against the FIAs green plan and undermine the efficiency of the engines by turning them up just to make them a bit louder?
Considering nobody seems to be even talking about the noise any more, why bother?
Considering nobody seems to be even talking about the noise any more, why bother?
(I can imagine I'll be spectacularly wrong and JRS will come and *buzz* me back into reality)
I dunno, aside from the aforementioned WEC....do monster trucks count?
Don
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,042
- Location
- In a house
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Turned up to 14k rpm these engines will still be dramatically more efficient than the V8's.
Using 100 or 150kg of fuel, getting 33 instead of 35% efficiency, these things don't make a general move to more sensible efficient engines disappear over night.
It's still getting significantly, massively more power out of the fuel than the V8's could.
From what I can see, Mercedes F1 2014 times are 1:35 Q2 and Q1, 1:37 fastest in lap race, basically no 1:40+ laps at all.
WEC 2015, Porsche managed to qualifying in the very high 1:39's, their fastest race lap was a 1:42.2 and couldn't win after qualifying on pole comfortably. The Audi qualified at 1:40.3 and did a fastest race lap of 1:40.8.
The 8MJ Porsche lost 2.5 seconds from full battery qualifying to in race fastest lap.
Headline bhp means precisely nothing in hybrid cars, qualifying laps and how much you can charge the battery vs how much you can actually harvest and use per lap in the race are entirely different things.
In fact, if they can't come close to charging 8MJ per lap, then carrying around that much extra battery gives them a boost in qualifying but is a penalty in the race. Sustainable bhp is all that matters. WE could double the battery size in F1, but that wouldn't magically let them harvest 8MJ per lap during a race so it would only further increase the lap times between qualifying and the race. Doubling the power of the mgu-k, again, it's about the amount you can harvest, not the potential output that matters.. unless you can harvest more than you can output which neither WEC nor F1 cars can.
On top of all that you likely have the problem that a much heavier WEC car can harvest more kinetic energy under braking. Though I don't believe they are twice as heavy, afaik minimum weight is 870kg and F1 is 691kg... though I had seen before but can't find now if that is final weight or if that is without fuel and driver.. for either.
So while a noticeably difference it's not double the weight and I believe WEC cars have a much smaller fuel tank 67 litres or something while F1 cars have what, around double that?
Hybrid is great, and it should be used more, but there are limits on the technology. But suggesting the lap times are pretty close is not remotely accurate. They are almost 5 seconds apart both in qualifying and in race pace, and that is comparing it to last years F1 cars at Silverstone, they've been significantly faster this year.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 6,243
- Location
- North of Watford Gap
How can you ensure parity when some of the current engines aren't even in the same ballpark?
I don't mind split-formula as such (we've had eras of them before anyway), but it can never be close to comparable and will vary from circuit to circuit and altitude above sea level.
Also, who's going to build the V8s? All the people who were making them are now making V6s. I doubt anyone would want to make both. Even just from a parity perspective why would someone like Mercedes invest in making a V6 they were banned from making go any faster than their ancient V8s?
There is also a massive assumption that going back to the V8s would see them cost the same as they used to, which is highly unlikely.
There is also a massive assumption that going back to the V8s would see them cost the same as they used to, which is highly unlikely.
Last edited:
