New engine, aero and tyre rules confirmed

[Nordic]

rules 2006

The new 2.4 V8 rules have been confirmed, along with a 2 meeting rule for the engines.

[billiaml]

It'll be interesting to see how the manufacturers respond to this -- Honda & BMW in particular; and whether or not this somehow becomes a factor in the sale/purchase of Cosworth.

With regards to the smaller teams still using the V10's, do you suppose they'll be using rev limiters to restrict the output of the engines or something else?

[006_007]

Originally posted by Nordic
rules 2006

The new 2.4 V8 rules have been confirmed, along with a 2 meeting rule for the engines.

Engines, as well as tires. Wow, will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Will be interesting to see the reaction from manufacturers that were opposed to these changes.

hrug:

[Red]

T'is a joke right? Someone tell me that this is a joke please!

"However, small independent teams will be allowed to continue with existing 3.0 litre V10s in 2006 and 2007, providing they have restricted output."

Like in Minardi can develop their 3 liter engines in 2006 and 2007, but they are not allowed to unleash all their horses? But wouldn't that give them an unfair advantage over BMW? How will FIA police that!

[Snrub]

At first I didn't think this was an interesting announcement, but then...

From the article:
"However, small independent teams will be allowed to continue with existing 3.0 litre V10s in 2006 and 2007, providing they have restricted output."

Somewhat of a surprised, but an excellent idea! Hopefully Jordan and Minardi will be a little closer to the action with this change. I have to wonder what teams like Toyota will think of this? What about Sauber, do they get to use this year's Ferrari V10 detuned to last two races?

Edit: I thought I was going to be the first reply - too slow.

[jhansen]

I still do not understand why BMW, Mercedes and Honda dislike the switch to V-8's. These engines are more similar to what is used in their road cars, which I think would be an excellent marketing issue. What's the sticking point?

[Red]

Because they have to develop brand new engines in completely different format rather than improving the ole V10's that they already know how to build. FIA simply doesnt understand that changing rules MIGHT cut costs, in long term, but in near future the costs will skyrocket. (and not even "long term" does apply, every week Maximillian Rufus Mosley, sir gets another brilliant idea)

[Snrub]

Originally posted by Red
Like in Minardi can develop their 3 liter engines in 2006 and 2007, but they are not allowed to unleash all their horses? But wouldn't that give them an unfair advantage over BMW? How will FIA police that!

Jordan and Minardi are probably down 150hp+ from BMW, etc. If they have to last a further race it might not be an issue. If it is they might simply be require to have some sort of intake restriction.

[Red]

Yes Snrub, but the hypocrisy kinda strikes me. Neither Jordan or Minardi or any other small independent actually "builds" engines so they can develop something. They buy them. So what Minardi is facing, is either buy new V8's (at of course, new prices) or "develop" (read invest in RD as well) 2-4 years old engines which manufacturers won't support and they'd be detuned anyway.

[Super Tourer]

The FIA press release in full:

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press...221004-01.html

FIA FORMULA ONE WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP
22.10.2004

On June 30, 2004, the World Motor Sport Council voted unanimously to invoke Article 7.5 of the Concorde Agreement and give notice to the Formula One Technical Working Group (TWG) to propose measures to reduce the performance of the cars within two months. Notice was given on July 6, 2004.

When the TWG failed to produce proposals by September 6, 2004, the FIA Technical Department proposed three packages of measures to the TWG, in accordance with Article 7.5(c).

In summary, all three packages involved bodywork changes to reduce downforce, new tyre rules to require “harder” tyres and a reduction in engine capacity from 3.0 to 2.4 litres with eight cylinders. Of the three, Package 1 gave the most aerodynamic freedom but imposed maximum restrictions on the engines; Package 2 gave less aerodynamic freedom but slightly fewer engine restrictions; and Package 3 imposed further aerodynamic restrictions but gave the same technical freedom for the 2.4 litre V8 engine as the current 3.0 litre V10.

All the teams were prepared to agree the bodywork changes and tyre regulations contained in Package 2. However, opinions differed on the engines. The closest to the necessary 8 out of 10 votes was at the meeting of September 6, 2004, when the TWG voted 7 to 3 in favour of the Package 2 engine rules.

The TWG met most recently on October 15, 2004, but still failed to vote 8 to 2 in favour of any one of the three packages within the 45 days specified by Article 7.5. The World Motor Sport Council was therefore free to impose its own measures from October 21, 2004, to come into force no sooner than three months from publication.

On October 21, 2004, the WMSC decided to impose Package 2 and that those parts of it which apply to 2005 would come into force on March 1, 2005 and the remainder on January 1, 2006.

Package 2 consists of the following measures:

2005 (to come into force on March 1, 2005)

Bodywork
Changes to the bodywork (aerodynamics) to raise the front wing, bring the rear wing forward, reduce the diffuser height and cut back the bodywork in front of the rear wheels.

Reason: it is estimated that these changes will result in the loss of 20% or more downforce with minimal loss of drag.

Tyres
One set of tyres must complete qualifying and the race.

Reason: a harder tyre will reduce cornering speeds.

Engines
Each engine must last for two complete Events

Reason: a two-race engine will give less power than a one-race engine.

2006 (to come into force 1 January 2006)

Engines
The introduction of a 2.4 litre V8 engine together with a number of restrictions concerning design and permitted materials.

Reason: reducing capacity is a sure way to reduce power (as repeatedly requested by the TWG), while technical restrictions will limit the rate of power increase. It is estimated that power will drop to about 700 bhp compared to the 1000 bhp that existing engines will reach by 2006.

In order not to prejudice the smaller independent teams the existing 3.0 litre V10 engines may continue to be used in 2006 and 2007, subject to a restriction on revs to be determined by the FIA

Reason: having reduced engine power, we need an inexpensive but competitive engine for the smaller independent teams, including newcomers. A rev-limited 3 litre can be adjusted to be competitive with factory 2.4 litre units, but will be far less costly.

The full text of the 2006 engine technical regulations is available on request. These regulations impose restrictions on engine development comparable to those already applicable to Formula One chassis. Such restrictions have by no means stifled technical development of the chassis, but they have prevented uncontrollable increases in performance. In a similar way the proposed engine restrictions will significantly slow the rate of increase of engine power output. Current freedoms have resulted in engines approaching 1000 bhp compared to the absolute maximum of 650 bhp promised when engine capacity was reduced from 3.5 litres to 3.0 litres in 1994/5 following the Imola fatalities.

[Mike_Wooshy]

just a question (a dumb 1) why cant they use diffrent types of engines, i.e Rotary engines, Horizontal engines, inline engines etc etc, why do they have to be V engines, i mean if they opened it up surely this would open upto manufactures who use these engines in road cars, ala porsche ans subaru with the Horizontal engines, and Mazda (albeit ford have pulled out) the rotary engine ????

[Super Tourer]

The tech bods in the paddock think that most of the downforce will be clawed back by the end of next season, despite the paring back.

The tyre rules mean no routine tyre changes during the pit stops, so cars that eat their tyres will suffer. It's believed that the FIA stepped back from the control tyre proposals due to the difficulty surrounding supply and sponsorship contracts with the teams, and the fear that it may come close to breaching EU regulations on freedom of trade.

[raul_iulian]

Will be interesting to see how this turns out. Maybe will see more action! Or maybe not!!!
And i still don't understant this: "However, small independent teams will be allowed to continue with existing 3.0 litre V10s in 2006 and 2007, providing they have restricted output."
This sure is silly!!!
They are supose to cut costs! I don't see that happening!!!

[Knowlesy]

Oh dear.....****ed about these V8's.

When I went to Silverstone and watched the F3000 i couldn't help but be slightly irritated by the sounds of the things. It was good at first, but soon grated. Whereas the F1 cars sounded glorious.

If F1 sounds like F3000 then Silverstone 2006 will be a test of patience!

[billiaml]

It seems like these particular changes are aimed more towards reducing speed than reducing cost. Of course, some of the teams will probably spend gobs of money to come up with ways to gain back some of the lost speed; and then the cycle goes on and on and on,.......

Don't have to buy as many motors per year? But won't a motor stout enough to last 2 races cost more than one that can be rebuilt after each race?

[006_007]

Originally posted by knowlesy
Oh dear.....****ed about these V8's.

When I went to Silverstone and watched the F3000 i couldn't help but be slightly irritated by the sounds of the things. It was good at first, but soon grated. Whereas the F1 cars sounded glorious.

The same argument was used when V-12's were banned. I didnt really mind the sound of M. Schumachers 1994 V-8 Benneton Ford........

[006_007]

Not sure if I should ask this question in this thread or start a new one, but knowlesy got me thinking about the new engine specs.

By reducing the displacement and the maximum number of cylinders we will probably be seeing a slight INCREASE in overall rpm due to less total rotating mass, plus less overall internat friction. Torque loss yes.

Am I completely out to lunch on this?

[alfasud]

Originally posted by Red
Like in Minardi can develop their 3 liter engines in 2006 and 2007, but they are not allowed to unleash all their horses? But wouldn't that give them an unfair advantage over BMW? How will FIA police that!

So when Minardi are leading the 2006 world championship, remind us of this thread and we'll agree that you might have had a point, but I somehow doubt that is going to be an issue.... if the FIA sees this as a serious problem, rev or inlet limits will be imposed.

[Sherman]

Forgive me for my ignorance but i was under the impression that Formula 1 was 'the pinnacle of motorsport'. Surely dumbing the sport down will only detract from the excitement. Ive been to grand prixs since i was 10, and quite frankly the more track time i see, the better i feel. Conserving engines and tyres will undoubtedly limit the fun of the trackside enthusiast as there will be more risk in coming out to practice. If it goes ahead at Silverstone next year, remind me to bring a good book....

[alfasud]

Originally posted by Red
Because they have to develop brand new engines in completely different format rather than improving the ole V10's that they already know how to build. FIA simply doesnt understand that changing rules MIGHT cut costs, in long term, but in near future the costs will skyrocket. (and not even "long term" does apply, every week Maximillian Rufus Mosley, sir gets another brilliant idea)

They already do build brand new engines.... in most of the top teams a new engine every year or two years at the most.

Have a look at the history of the Ferrari V10 and how many times the V-angle changed or have a look at the BMW V10 and see how the weight changed from the engine they used in 2000 at 120kg, through 2001 (98kg) to the latest which are under 90kg. This is not achieved by changing just one part for a slightly lighter one.... otherwise they would have done it earlier if it was that simple.... it's a little bit lighter thoughout the engine... in fact a whole new engine virtually every year.

Now let's look at 2.4L V8's.... if you want to, you can keep the same pistons, valves etc, that you used in your V10, at least in your first generation 2.4L V8. Many of the castings (heads etc) can simply be a modification of the ones used in the V10, there will be some optimisation and new casting molds will be needed, but since the top teams do that every year anyway, it shouldn't be a big deal.

I'm sure some of the top teams already have V8 test engines running.

Consider the old days when teams changed between different engine formats.... Alfa went from flat-12 (in Brabham chassis), to V12, to turbo V8 in about 3 seasons. Look at the early 90's where Merc changed a V8 into a 2.5L V6 to race in DTM, but people seem to be saying that with all the lastest CAD/CAM techniques it can't be done in F1 today.

But the new rules aren't just about changing format to V8... there is (at least in earlier proposals) minimum weights and min centre of gravity of the engine, and other restrictions, so there should be less incentive to make big changes every year and less disadvantage for smaller teams that use older engines. Ultimately it will lead to closer and lower cost racing.... which might be why some are against it.

[Snrub]

I read elsewhere that the revs of the Minardi/Jordan V10s will be limited to control power. Essentially what this will do is give them the reliability they need to compete without requiring huge changes to the engines. Yes it will cost some money to change the current engines, but it'll be far less than if they had to buy new top of the line 2.4L engines reving to 18k+ to last 2 races.

Regarding the dumbing down objections, F1 always has to be dumbed down and you're fooling yourself if you don't think that if they had no restrictions they wouldn't be completing laps at psychoticly dangerous speeds. I'm sure any casual fan could come up with some ideas to make the cars tens of seconds a lap faster. (eg. 5L flat 12 turbo engines, meter wide tires, undertrays with huge tunnels, 20 element wings, 8 tires)

[Thorstone]

Bye bye Formula one

[gttouring]

Max is bonkers
he isn't a modern engineer
a 3 L V10 gets by honda standards 1000HP
lop off two cylinders and at the same efficiency you have 800HP
um duh,
and the lighter wieght and less rotating mass- fster acceleration and corner speed
a V10 adn harder tyres one set per weekend (maybe they need larger rims? and solid rubber tyres?)
or balzing hard like in 1967 well then we wold see slower cars
F1 maybe should simply go wingless
and 1 litre turbo engines
oh wait- the top form of motor sports will find a way (1.5 litre 1500hp BMW?)
so why not simply switch fuels?
if they run Diesel well they be a lot slower and provide for cutting edge tech on the alternate fuel. or go with pushrods and lower the limit byt sheer physics- they can make power but i bet it would top out at around 12K RPM

or runHydrogen internal combustion engines like that weird BMW test car
a 6 litre V12 had 450 or so HP on hydrogen it was at 283 HP
sounds like the best way to reduce speed
note this is not a fuel cell or electric- good old I.C. and flaming exhaust tips
Max is a Dope

at least at the 20KRPM the V8's will turn will sound like the current shriek

[ss_collins]

Now let's look at 2.4L V8's.... if you want to, you can keep the same pistons, valves etc, that you used in your V10, at least in your first generation 2.4L V8. Many of the castings (heads etc) can simply be a modification of the ones used in the V10, there will be some optimisation and new casting molds will be needed, but since the top teams do that every year anyway, it shouldn't be a big deal.

We all know that that simply isn't the case - a V8 is a totally different concept when you are looking at things from an F1 point of view, I doubt 2 parts of the engine will be the same.

Of course what the FIA want is 1500km engine - funny I thought I saw some ofthose in France in June... N138 i think it was.

[oziengineer]

Well, they are finally in. F1 will never be the same. It's a shame really, because no one has died in these cars since senna, and they are probably safer than ever. Hopefully within a few years they'll be back up to hyper power to give Max Mosley the big finger.