[Rules] Formula 1 set to adopt global racing engine

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

An estimated 650 BHP from a turbocharged 1.6l 4cyl inline engine doesn't really look good, to be honest...
That's along the lines of GP2... (with 612 BHP)

Unless they beef up the boost for F1, but then it'd still sound the same.
Lawnmowers, whoopee.

A reliable 800bhp would be very easily attainable from 1600cc I4 turbo using the kind of technology they have today in F1. 650bhp motors would probably last several seasons' racing !

[JamesH]

I simply cannot believe that people are calling 4 cylinder turbo 650hp machines a lawnmower!!

Given that almost no-one on this forum will have driven anything over 300hp, and most not even over 200hp, there really is some arse gravy being spoken.

As others have said, with F1 engine tech, a 4 cylinder 1.6l turbo would produce 800 at least I would have thought. It would sound mental as well. Not the mental of current engines, but mental nevertheless.

[ASCII Man]

Current engines do not sound mental, at all.

Bring back V10's and V12's. *raises fist without black glove*

[#15 tkm 4/]

Originally Posted by JamesH

I simply cannot believe that people are calling 4 cylinder turbo 650hp machines a lawnmower!!

Given that almost no-one on this forum will have driven anything over 300hp, and most not even over 200hp, there really is some arse gravy being spoken.

As others have said, with F1 engine tech, a 4 cylinder 1.6l turbo would produce 800 at least I would have thought. It would sound mental as well. Not the mental of current engines, but mental nevertheless.

My road car, with 467 ATW

I say bring back mazda with there 1.3 rotary engines, then they will sound like proper race cars again! :P

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by JamesH

I simply cannot believe that people are calling 4 cylinder turbo 650hp machines a lawnmower!!

Given that almost no-one on this forum will have driven anything over 300hp, and most not even over 200hp, there really is some arse gravy being spoken.

As others have said, with F1 engine tech, a 4 cylinder 1.6l turbo would produce 800 at least I would have thought. It would sound mental as well. Not the mental of current engines, but mental nevertheless.

I have driven a 400 BHP sports car...

[MikeManNZ]

Seeing as BMW were getting 1200+ BHP in qualifying trim out of 1.5L L4's in the mid-1980's 800ish BHP should be easily attainable today even with an 11,000 rev limit.

I like the idea coupled with ground effects.

[Marbot]

Also. A 1.6 litre engine with a turbo is going to be much more more driveable (torquey) than a 2.4 non-turbo engine, particularly if modern turbo technology (variable vanes etc) is used.

Note: Maybe there will be the opportunity to use multiple turbo's?

Many modern small car engines already use a combination of turbo's and superchargers (VW etc).

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I have driven a 400 BHP sports car...

I did say *almost* no-one....

I have raced cars, but the max powered car I have ever driven is 350. My race car is about 85........and is still colossal fun.

[JamesH]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

Current engines do not sound mental, at all.

Bring back V10's and V12's. *raises fist without black glove*

True - the Benetton V12 I saw/heard/felt at Brands a few years back was rather impressive!

[Cynic]

I think my views are well known by now. IMO the GRE has no place or relevance in motorsport genereally and definitely not in F1. The day it is introduced will be the day I turn my back on all FIA controlled motorsport.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by JamesH

I simply cannot believe that people are calling 4 cylinder turbo 650hp machines a lawnmower!!

Given that almost no-one on this forum will have driven anything over 300hp, and most not even over 200hp, there really is some arse gravy being spoken.

As others have said, with F1 engine tech, a 4 cylinder 1.6l turbo would produce 800 at least I would have thought. It would sound mental as well. Not the mental of current engines, but mental nevertheless.

In 1988 Megatron tuned BMW's production-based M12-engine. The engine was a 1500cc L4T with its turbo boost limited to 2.5 bar and generated around 620 bhp.

[EGG]

I think the regs are somewhat stuck in in the GFC "downsizing/economising/eco-friendly" train of thought.

The ground effects I support, but with the reduced engine sizes, they run the risk of someone turning up with a rival series touting 3.5 V12's or the like. And if the racing is average, fans/teams could gravitate away.

[Spritle]

The WIFE'S car is around 360 bhp, a tad bit more than my lawn mower.

I for one don't want to be able to buy anything that comes close to an F1 Car. That's why I watch, to be in awe of the power. When the day comes that my wife can drive a car that may be able to kick an F1 car's arse...

...I'll start watching something else.

[Spritle]

BTW - a completely new engine format, probably a new chassis, ground effects...

...this saves money how?

[phoenix]

Ferrari indicate that they won't be playing:

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...D=385828&FS=F1

Who can blame them? They have never had a production 4 cylinder engine.....

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by phoenix

Ferrari indicate that they won't be playing:

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...D=385828&FS=F1

Who can blame them? They have never had a production 4 cylinder engine.....

Perhaps before Ferrari are allowed to blackmail the sport once again there should be a survey of the fans, how about:

Please choose the statement you most strongly agree with:

a) Formula 1 would be just as good as it is now without Ferrari
b) Formula 1 would be a fairer sporting series without Ferrari
c) The prospect of Formula1 without Ferrari is very exciting, I am looking forward to the 2013 season already
d) The disappearance of the one team that believes it is bigger than the sport would be an important step forward for F1

[SennaTheGreat]

Originally Posted by fourWheelDrift

Please choose the statement you most strongly agree with:

a) Formula 1 would be just as good as it is now without Ferrari
b) Formula 1 would be a fairer sporting series without Ferrari
c) The prospect of Formula1 without Ferrari is very exciting, I am looking forward to the 2013 season already
d) The disappearance of the one team that believes it is bigger than the sport would be an important step forward for F1

a, b, c, and d?

[johntt]

Originally Posted by I Rosputnik

So one engine can be used in F1, WTCC and WRC? I would be amazed if GT1 goes with 1.6 turbo engines...

I doubt they would, they would use a racing version of whats in the road car.

The ACO controlled GT classes will use whats in the road car as well, though a few years down the line a Corvette with a V6 turbowon't be out of the question, neither would an M3 with a 2.0l turbo or a 2.0l flat-6 Porsche (re. BMW and Porsche its not as if they don;t have a history of those types of engine)

The GRE is mainly designed for single seaters + DTM and as an engine option for P1 in the future (alongside the NA and diesel engines that the ACO allow).

The fact that its being used in rallying and touring cars is purely down to the fact that 1.6l turbos are what most road cars of S2000 size are using in the production car.

And of anyone thinks that 650bhp isn't enough for F1 may I point out that with ground effects the cars will be running less/smaller wings which will produce less drag and therefore mean the cars will need less power to maintain the same speeds that they currently do. Less wings also mean less turbulence and better racing.

[Sodemo]

If they insist on going to turbos then I would much prefer V6 turbos. Straight 4's don't really do it for me.

In fact, they should just turbo charge V12's instead.

[SennaTheGreat]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

In fact, they should just turbo charge V12's instead.

POWWWWEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

Maybe IndyCar should use the same engine as F1, and not get bent by Honda

I believe the argument against is the engine can't be stressed enough and in the event of an accident on an oval, it would break off.

Though it pertains to IndyCars, there's some interesting stuff about engines and engine regs in this Gordon Kirby article with some input from Mario Ilien of Ilmor fame.

http://gordonkirby.com/categories/co..._is_no237.html

[Pingguest]

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

[Pingguest]

The manufactures initially pushed forward the GRE, but it seems they've turned their back to it.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...o-2786432.html

Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari have estimated that developing the proposed engine will cost around €100 million. Cosworth has estimated it could develop an engine according to the proposed regulations for €20 million. Its customer will then have to pay for the development, but as the smaller teams lease their engines for €6 million a year, the engine manufactures fear the costs will be too high.

Thus the manufactures want to keep the current V8s, although with gasoline direct injection, a fuel-flow restriction and KERS.

[Marbot]

Austerity seems to be breaking out everywhere!

Can't see the point of developing an engine that probably won't be the way that most car manufacturers intend to go anyway, and the BMW/Mercedes/whatever that's just passed you will more than likely be a diesel, at least in Europe it will anyway.

It's not like road car development is ever moved on or held back by whatever happens or doesn't happen in F1 on a technological basis.

[JAG]

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

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.