[Rules] Formula 1 set to adopt global racing engine

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by JAG

Road car investment is moving away from diesel to petrol turbos.

It is, but where was F1 when Europe went 'diesel'?

And even the current downsized petrol turbos (1.2, 1.4, 1.6 litre etc) are no match for diesel power.

Originally Posted by JAG

All motorsport has operated in a vacum until recently but we are reaching a stage were new technology has to be developed for the road otherwise performance cars are going to be legislated and/or priced off the road.

Which is probably why KERS is making a comeback next season.

But a gas guzzling Ferrari will always be a gas guzzler in comparison to more mundane cars equipped with the same technology.

[Pingguest]

The question is how much ahead should Formula 1 be in road relevant technologies? If Formula 1 had went to diesel engines because road cars 'did', Formula 1 would only follow today's road car trends. The sport would contribute to the car of today. But what about the car of tomorrow?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

But what about the car of tomorrow?

The road car of tomorrow will probably be even further removed from F1 cars that most 'petrol-heads' want to see out on track.

Even now they pine for the acoustic perfection that was a Ferrari V12 engine - never to be heard again (unless you watch/listen to the Super-league series etc).

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

The road car of tomorrow will probably be even further removed from F1 cars that most 'petrol-heads' want to see out on track.

Even now they pine for the acoustic perfection that was a Ferrari V12 engine - never to be heard again (unless you watch/listen to the Super-league series etc).

They could well decide to race with internal combustion engines running on hydrogen.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by Marbot

It is, but where was F1 when Europe went 'diesel'?

And even the current downsized petrol turbos (1.2, 1.4, 1.6 litre etc) are no match for diesel power.

Which is probably why KERS is making a comeback next season.

But a gas guzzling Ferrari will always be a gas guzzler in comparison to more mundane cars equipped with the same technology.

F1 can't easily follow what is essentially a short term trend like diesel technology like prototype sportscars which traditionally allows a wide variety of motors.

Peugeots next P1 is reportedly a petrol turbo with KERS so that could be the begining of the end for the diesel era. A few years down the line the ACO will apparently dictate a certain amount of energy with it being upto manufacturers to use whatever technology they prefare.

F1 being a sprint series makes it difficult to adopt varied technologies that maybe balanced over 24hrs but not 2hrs.

You bring up Ferrari but they themselves have said emission regulations could force out V10/V12's and anything but turbo and/or hybrid road cars.

[Pingguest]

In fact Ferrari is working on a hybrid car already.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

In fact Ferrari is working on a hybrid car already.

20 mpg could be a realistic possibility then.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

20 mpg could be a realistic possibility then.

Ferrari expects that 25 mpg is reachable with their 599 GTB Fiorano.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Ferrari expects that 25 mpg is reachable with their 599 GTB Fiorano.

I guess that for the sort of people that are able to afford such cars, it's not too bad. It's a long way short of 'real world' high performance diesel car economy though, which also can benefit from the same technology.

[Pingguest]

And this makes me wonder whether Formula 1 should mandate a specific configuration.

[rocketracer]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Cosworth on the 2013 engine regulations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w39wcmDj2Rg

thanks ping, i found that really very interesting.

the debate surrounding the costs / spending limitations is only looking at one side of the balance sheet. put simply, there are 2 sides to consider - the outlay / investment and also the returns.

by mandating a 4cyl turbo internal combustion engine, there really is very little scope to generate any returns on this investment ,other than selling it to a team for a higher price, or f1 marketing / branding.

i would really like the idea of mandated fuel quotas, and fuel flow restrictions, and then open up the regs for waste energy harnessing.

It's an area which has 'real world' relevance, and therefore likely to generate income for innovative independent (or manufacturer) teams. The williams / porsche KERS marriage is a good recent example.

[ensign14]

I've always thought motor racing should be split into two - the pure engineering of F1 and the "real world" of sportscars. But to ensure ingenuity in F1 you restrict the spending to (say) £50m per team. And widen the regulations to allow whatever you can manage within that. Would be difficult, but surely not impossible, to enforce.

And the sportscars can concentrate on the greenery. With unlimited spends perhaps for some categories. Ideally you would have two - anything road-legal, and anything mass-produced. There might need to be a third to allow for non-manufacturer teams to compete with road-legal cars.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by ensign14

I've always thought motor racing should be split into two - the pure engineering of F1 and the "real world" of sportscars.

Indeed. But how would you stop a spending competition?

Originally Posted by ensign14

But to ensure ingenuity in F1 you restrict the spending to (say) £50m per team.

That might work.

Originally Posted by ensign14

And widen the regulations to allow whatever you can manage within that.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by ensign14

Would be difficult, but surely not impossible, to enforce.

It would almost be self-policing. No one wants to run the risk of another 'gate' do they. And just like the current resource restriction agreement, any loopholes found would have to be reported to FOTA.

[NaBUru38]

F1 should start using this fuel flow restrictor and slowly open the rest of the engine rules, except those which increase costs uncecessarily.

[TRuss]

I also enjoyed the video Pinguest. I found it very interesting and myself in agreement with what was being said. I do think that 2013 can be really good. I've been wanting to see a modern version of a late 70's early 80's F1 car for a while now. Maybe this will come close.

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

The question is how much ahead should Formula 1 be in road relevant technologies? If Formula 1 had went to diesel engines because road cars 'did', Formula 1 would only follow today's road car trends. The sport would contribute to the car of today. But what about the car of tomorrow?

Formula 1 isn't really about "innovation" for the actual technology, though. It's usually been about applications of technology to racing, and the adaptation and refining of that technology to make it more efficient. Most of the actual technology that F1 takes credit for innovating was borne in the aerospace industry, anyway.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

Formula 1 isn't really about "innovation" for the actual technology, though. It's usually been about applications of technology to racing, and the adaptation and refining of that technology to make it more efficient. Most of the actual technology that F1 takes credit for innovating was borne in the aerospace industry, anyway.

Yup. Difference between science and engineering or maths and applied maths.

Fuel flow will mainly have the effect on reducing Aero because of the drag the structures produce, most of the horsepower is absorbed by aerodynamic drag.

Open KERS would be interesting, but then the spending would get out of hand. Energy recovers should be unrestricted and allowed from any source, then maybe we would see a dramatic breakthrough somewhere.

[JamesH]

I'd go for something like the Jag hybrid prototype C-X75 - twin micro turbines driving 4 (194hp each) in wheel electric motors via a lithium battery pack. Combine that with their flywheel tech....

It may not sound too much like a v12, but it will sound like a Typhoon (the latest one, not the old one)

[Pingguest]

The FIA could mandate the cars to be propelled by (a) electronic motor(s). The battery could be charged by all means: kinetic energy from the brakes or dampers or from the internal combustion engine that works as a generator.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by JamesH

I'd go for something like the Jag hybrid prototype C-X75 - twin micro turbines driving 4 (194hp each) in wheel electric motors via a lithium battery pack. Combine that with their flywheel tech....

It may not sound too much like a v12, but it will sound like a Typhoon (the latest one, not the old one)

Why does every tech Geek insist on putting an electric motor in the wheels. Brilliant for unsprung weight - NOT, in order to save a couple of CV joints. Do they even understand how a suspension works?

KERS systems regulation should ban any form of battery as they are just an environmental disaster from the time mining lithium starts to the disposal of the hazardous cocktail they are composed of.

[josvandeperre]

Originally Posted by wnut

KERS systems regulation should ban any form of battery as they are just an environmental disaster from the time mining lithium starts to the disposal of the hazardous cocktail they are composed of.

Naughty boy - don't mention the elephant in the room.....

And you missed the bit about slave labour arguably being used in the mining process

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

Formula 1 isn't really about "innovation" for the actual technology, though. It's usually been about applications of technology to racing, and the adaptation and refining of that technology to make it more efficient. Most of the actual technology that F1 takes credit for innovating was borne in the aerospace industry, anyway.

I disagree, I think Formula1 is about innovation. Yes there is the application of technology to racing but the innovation comes from how that technology is applied as well as designing or redisigning aspects of the car so the technology can be used.

Take ground effect, for example. Designers knew the principle behind it and it had even been tried back in 1970 when MARCH produced the 701, with wing shaped side tanks. However, it wasn't until Colin Chapman realised that if the air under the car could be prevented from escaping side ways by using first brushes, then sliding skirts along the length of the side-pods, that ground effect could work properly.

[Pingguest]

No Global Racing Engine, according to Norbert Haug.
http://www.f1sa.com/index.php?option...:f1&Itemid=157

[RF_Racer]

I think the Global engine is a silly approach, F1 suppose to be the Pinnacle, its a prototype championship, why should it have any resembalance to road cars? BTCC and Touring cars have more in common. Ok, efforts should be made on fuel economy/efficiency, but lets have powerful engines and fast cars!

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by RF_Racer

I think the Global engine is a silly approach, F1 suppose to be the Pinnacle, its a prototype championship, why should it have any resembalance to road cars? BTCC and Touring cars have more in common. Ok, efforts should be made on fuel economy/efficiency, but lets have powerful engines and fast cars!

But surely that's a contradiction in terms. If its supposed to be the pinnacle and have no resemblence to anything on the road, why should fuel economy and fuel efficiency have any relevance ?

To reiterate what I said earlier... what is F1 supposed to be ?

o An [almost] no limits engineering challenge to develop the world's most advanced cars to get around a road course with the sole purpose of providing sporting entertainment for fans.

o A platform to experiment and showcase road relevant engineering and prototyping.