Next season V8's

[pitcrew]

So with next seasons development started already for many of the teams including Ferrari
whats the views, expectations and opinions of everyone. and now reving up to 22,000 RPM

Ps whats the new weight limit? assuming its changing

[Sodemo]

Im expecting them to sound like my Dads Range Rover.

V8s don't belong in F1 anymore.
It will just make F1 like many other racing series, using V8s. With V10, they had a unique shrill sound, a signature if you will.

Bring back the V12s.

[BSchneiderFan]

I'd be much happier if they just didn't specify an engine format.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by The Monster

Im expecting them to sound like my Dads Range Rover.

V8s don't belong in F1 anymore.
It will just make F1 like many other racing series, using V8s. With V10, they had a unique shrill sound, a signature if you will.

Bring back the V12s.

I would like to hear your dad's car

[JohnSSC]

If you wanted to make it technologically interesting, then why not a V-4 like the Saab Sonnets used? Combine that with a requirement that the chassis have wood as a frame-member ala Morgans and you have the basis for an extremely interesting and challenging technical formula. Anyone with an engineering degree can work with carbon-fiber and unobtanium. Wood, on the other hand would make things very interesting as a stressed chassis piece!

Personally, I like the idea of using them old inline airplane engines like they did in cars at Brooklands or pre-depression Indianapolis races.

[thejester]

And wind-up starters as opposed to these electric things.

And make them run accross the track to their cars.

[richard_sykes]

Bring back the BRM H-16

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by pitcrew

So with next seasons development started already for many of the teams including Ferrari
whats the views, expectations and opinions of everyone. and now reving up to 22,000 RPM

Ps whats the new weight limit? assuming its changing

Engine must weigh a minimum of 95 KGs.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by The Monster

Im expecting them to sound like my Dads Range Rover.

V8s don't belong in F1 anymore.
It will just make F1 like many other racing series, using V8s. With V10, they had a unique shrill sound, a signature if you will.

Bring back the V12s.

I doubt you will notice any difference in the sound at all - the rev limit will be higher, and the number of individual cylinder firings per second will likely be pretty much the same as now.

[JohnSSC]

Or maybe they could start on those narrow tires that B. Rosemeyer and J. Fangio used!

[Menelaos]

I wish they called off the tyre regulation and the unnacceptable 2-race per engine thing and brought the qualies back to the "original". Then they can do whatever they want with the rest

The thing is, i find it very stupid to say 1 engine for 2 races, cause (once again, exactly like the new qualies) you make a driver think about it twice before doing anything quite risky. I mean, one set of tyres, one "tired" engine (or an engine you want to keep for one more gp), huge dissadvantage in qualies if you retire, only 2 points difference between 1st & 2ns - why would anyone risk it?

[Glen]

Menalaos - The risks go both ways - you are just as unlikely to push your engine in defending position as you are to be reluctant to push it chasing. Without a doubt I think the latest form of the rules is giving us more suprises, which is good with me and the reason that I disagree with your assessment.

Aren't the next engines going to be even longer life - anyone know?

[Silk Cut Jaguar]

If I remember right the FIA are slowly going to extend the requirments for engine life, eventually up to 6 races.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Glen

Menalaos - The risks go both ways - you are just as unlikely to push your engine in defending position as you are to be reluctant to push it chasing. Without a doubt I think the latest form of the rules is giving us more suprises, which is good with me and the reason that I disagree with your assessment.

Formula 1 shouldn't be a lottery. It doesn't make sense if a driver gets punished after an engine failure on Friday.

Aren't the next engines going to be even longer life - anyone know?

As far as I know, the new V8 engines will have to last two race weekends.

[Glen]

It isn't a lottery! It is pure science - when a team and driver go over their limits on the engine, they do so knowingly and knowing they are taking a risk. That risk is part of the competition. If a team wants 100% reliability they should turn their engines down and not exceed the limits.

Long life engines are for desperately needed cost savings.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Glen

It isn't a lottery! It is pure science - when a team and driver go over their limits on the engine, they do so knowingly and knowing they are taking a risk. That risk is part of the competition. If a team wants 100% reliability they should turn their engines down and not exceed the limits.

An engine failure isn't caused by just going over the limit sometimes. Schumacher dropped ten places back on the starting grid in Brazil last year, after a crash in the final free practise on Saturday.

Long life engines are for desperately needed cost savings.

I really doubt whether the long life engines have decreased the costs. The production costs have decreased, but the development costs have increased extremely. And the increase of development costs is not only a temporary.

[Menelaos]

Well, the idea is that this year the research costs were huge but they will slowly fade and then the cost will be drammatically reduced, which is also what the teams believe.

However, I still find it negative to punish a driver in the next gp for a problem he had in the previous one. I think GPs must be totally separate from each other.

Plus, an engine might be destroyed due to other problems with the car. Someone might get hit by another driver and then lose air circulation and end up with a problem in the engine.

And of course that's even more intense with the stupid (imo) qualies. Webber hits you and then you have to go out first. Or take another possibility: a team has a clear 1-2 preference in their drivers, and #1 is going for the title, chased by another guy X. They can simply ask #2 to hit X and then X will have a huge disadvantage. This is conspiracy theory, but you all know Senna, Prost, MS (just to name a few) forced (or tried to force) their oppenents off-track to win the title. But at least they could dsq MS when he did it. Now if the forementioned #2 driver forced the opponent of road, or hit him on purpose, what can the FIA do? They obviously can't dsq the whole team (team orders are supposed to be extinct) and they also can't dsq driver #1, because he will say he knows nothing about the whole thing....

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

I really doubt whether the long life engines have decreased the costs.

agreed cost savings in F1 are an illusion.

as for the V8's, if the revs are as high as people have been suggesting, will that necessarily translate into more speed, and with the regs the way they are this year will they need to be changed again to deal with faster cars?

[GolddustMini]

Originally Posted by Menelaos

Well, the idea is that this year the research costs were huge but they will slowly fade and then the cost will be drammatically reduced, which is also what the teams believe.

However, I still find it negative to punish a driver in the next gp for a problem he had in the previous one. I think GPs must be totally separate from each other.

Plus, an engine might be destroyed due to other problems with the car. Someone might get hit by another driver and then lose air circulation and end up with a problem in the engine.

And of course that's even more intense with the stupid (imo) qualies. Webber hits you and then you have to go out first. Or take another possibility: a team has a clear 1-2 preference in their drivers, and #1 is going for the title, chased by another guy X. They can simply ask #2 to hit X and then X will have a huge disadvantage. This is conspiracy theory, but you all know Senna, Prost, MS (just to name a few) forced (or tried to force) their oppenents off-track to win the title. But at least they could dsq MS when he did it. Now if the forementioned #2 driver forced the opponent of road, or hit him on purpose, what can the FIA do? They obviously can't dsq the whole team (team orders are supposed to be extinct) and they also can't dsq driver #1, because he will say he knows nothing about the whole thing....

that could happen anyway and isnt a product of the new rules.

[Menelaos]

yeah, but now you ruin two races.

[Datsun]

Can't figure why anyone thinks revs will be higher. Given that a 2.4 liter V8 is essentially a 3.0 V10 minus two cylinders, the bore/stroke dimensions should not change much, so for the same peak piston speeds/accelerations, revs will be the same (plus a small marginal increase due to development).

Agree cylinder count should be totally OPEN. I LOVED hearing the Ford V8s, Renault V10s, Ferrari and Honda V12s racing against each other in the early 90s, all with a legitimate chances of winning.

F1 rulesmaking

[GolddustMini]

Originally Posted by Datsun

Can't figure why anyone thinks revs will be higher. Given that a 2.4 liter V8 is essentially a 3.0 V10 minus two cylinders, the bore/stroke dimensions should not change much, so for the same peak piston speeds/accelerations, revs will be the same (plus a small marginal increase due to development).

Agree cylinder count should be totally OPEN. I LOVED hearing the Ford V8s, Renault V10s, Ferrari and Honda V12s racing against each other in the early 90s, all with a legitimate chances of winning.

F1 rulesmaking

less rotational inertia (shorter crankshaft, fewer pistons, rods, valves, springs etc, plus theoretically a 1/5th less friction. this means that the peak piston speeds could infact be increased, leading to higher reving engines.

the capacity of the engine doesnt alter the ability of an engine to rev, think about bike engines they are the same size as small car engines yet they rev in the region of 4k rpm faster. due to a reduction in the inertia of components. by removing cylinders from a formula one engine you effectively reduce the friction preventing the engine from revving higher.

however whether the manufacturers can find valve closure meathods that will operate faster is a lottery in its self. although im sure some manufacturers have tricks up there sleaves in the coming years (solenoid controlled valves, variable pneumatic valve closure systems - im not sure to what state f1 development has got to at the moment, i know they run pneumatic springs at the moment)

[Datsun]

Friction isn't what limits revs, it's peak component accelerations. With a fixed number of cylinders, capacity DOES alter the ability of an engine to rev. With bore/stroke and rod length/stroke kept constant, rev potential will roughly vary with the cube root of cylinder displacement. Small car engines vs. bike engines have very different design goals. Small car engine is typically designed for max efficiency, not max power. 1000cc sport bike engines are designed for max power. Besides 1000cc is still a lot smaller than the smallest car engines (in the U.S, anyway...).

Fewer pistons and valves, of the SAME SIZE, operating through the same range of motion, implies equivalent rev potential.

The only thing that comes into play is the reduced crank length, which means it will be inherently torsionally stiffer.

We'll see next year, if the new V8s rev to 22,000, I'll buy you a beer

[Snrub]

I've heard that the length of the crankshaft was one of the major barriers on the V10 peak revs. If you shorten up the crankshaft it stands to reason that you could spin it faster.

Originally Posted by Datsun

Small car engine is typically designed for max efficiency, not max power.

Not that F1 has anything to do with normal cars, but that's not necessarly true. The Honda S2000, the old Civic 160hp 1.6L and Toyota 1.8L come to mind.

Besides 1000cc is still a lot smaller than the smallest car engines (in the U.S, anyway...).

Like the 1.0L Honda Insight, the old 1.0L Geo Metro and the 1.3L Mazda RX-8 engines? (you do have a valid point though)

[Tone]

Originally Posted by Datsun

We'll see next year, if the new V8s rev to 22,000, I'll buy you a beer

The Cosworth development engines are running 20,000RPM at the moment.. so maybe the engine builders with more money could do it??