No I4 in 2013; V6 in 2014 instead!
- Thread starter Hxc
- Start date
Associate
Odd???? its beyond that my friend. why make f1 cars eco friendly, seriously I can see the point but surly its taking away the number 1 thing in f1, the noise. rather than switching to small v8's then to the silly v6's or what ever. why just keep the v12's but make them more 'green'.
superleague seem to have hit the nail on the head for me.
I don't see why f1 should be like that, they sound like old gp cars from the 90's.
Last edited:
Soldato
It's not odd, it's turning the clock back 30 years.
The original plan for 4 pot engines had a major flaw - they sound rubbish. Go search youtube and listen to some V6 turbo F1 cars from the 80s like the McLaren-TAG, Lotus-Renault or Williams-Honda. This side of a Ferrari or Honda V12 they're about as awesome as you can get sonically. The late 80s cars revved to around 12000 rpm, so the 15000 rpm limit should do nicely.
Oh and sauce : http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92743
The original plan for 4 pot engines had a major flaw - they sound rubbish. Go search youtube and listen to some V6 turbo F1 cars from the 80s like the McLaren-TAG, Lotus-Renault or Williams-Honda. This side of a Ferrari or Honda V12 they're about as awesome as you can get sonically. The late 80s cars revved to around 12000 rpm, so the 15000 rpm limit should do nicely.
Oh and sauce : http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/92743
Associate
mhh........sound good but these days you never know.
Soldato
They should.
Unfortunately the stuff that comes out of the exhaust metaphorically clubs baby seals to death. Marketing drones have determined this is bad for car makers who are trying to sell "green" (or blue if your German) cars to customers.
Unfortunately the stuff that comes out of the exhaust metaphorically clubs baby seals to death. Marketing drones have determined this is bad for car makers who are trying to sell "green" (or blue if your German) cars to customers.
The field spread looks pretty high at the moment to me, especially with HRT\Lotus\Virgin's performance at the last two races. When the likes of de la Rosa in a Sauber are lapping cars, you know they're slow.
Apart from Renault twice, only the top three teams have been on the podium in 2011. Vettel\RBR are no less dominant than Schumacher\Ferrari in 2002.
Oh, and here's a version of the "Trulli train" some of you probably hadn't contemplated:
Just to prove it wasn't a one lap fluke:
Apart from Renault twice, only the top three teams have been on the podium in 2011. Vettel\RBR are no less dominant than Schumacher\Ferrari in 2002.
Oh, and here's a version of the "Trulli train" some of you probably hadn't contemplated:
Just to prove it wasn't a one lap fluke:
Associate
Some more engine reg news.
The 1.6 V6 (15k RPM) turbo engines can only have 1 turbo charger but compounding is allowed. They will also be direct injection but are limited on fuel flow.
Single turbo probably means the turbo will sit in the V of the engine, possibly looking a bit like this:
An indycar engine.
Scarbs also saying the compound turbo could be used as a KERS generator.
The 1.6 V6 (15k RPM) turbo engines can only have 1 turbo charger but compounding is allowed. They will also be direct injection but are limited on fuel flow.
Single turbo probably means the turbo will sit in the V of the engine, possibly looking a bit like this:
An indycar engine.
Scarbs also saying the compound turbo could be used as a KERS generator.
Last edited:
Its rumours of the other direction that interests me the most. Using a KERS charged battery to spin small motors to pre-spin turbos to provide an Anti-Lag system. Not only is it clever, but I can see it being directly transferable to road cars.
And my 'odd' engine choice is in regards to what the FIA are trying to do with F1 through this new engine specification. They want to get more car makers involved in making engines, yet have chosen a format of engine that is not used by any major car maker in its road cars....
Where did you get this? I swear I read something saying that they would look at compounding after the first year.