How to fix F1?

[Sodemo]

I think in terms of F1's direction the powers that be are really in an unenviable position in that sticking with the status quo is expensive and will start to lose relevance in the near future, but they can't go full electric for a number of reasons (1 I understand is contractual with Formula E) the others are more practical reasons, however they cant be seen to go back, because F1 never goes back and does U turns because that would seen to be a retrograde step, so I cant see V8s returning.

What I think might happen is that they will stick with the V6 formula but probably have a more conventional (cheaper) design with a not as expensive hybrid system.

[Peter Mallett]

I think your post demonstrates the major issue. Whatever it does in an effort to be relevant it becomes irrelevant. Classic catch 22. Moving to a cheaper form of V6 PU suggests that it has been burning money for no good reason.

If we took away the need to be relevant and just concentrated on racing then the profile would be severely reduced. But since its profile is being eroded by the quest for relevance it may be that the next changes will be the last for the current business model.

[Richard Casto]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

I think in terms of F1's direction the powers that be are really in an unenviable position in that sticking with the status quo is expensive and will start to lose relevance in the near future, but they can't go full electric for a number of reasons (1 I understand is contractual with Formula E) the others are more practical reasons, however they cant be seen to go back, because F1 never goes back and does U turns because that would seen to be a retrograde step, so I cant see V8s returning.

What I think might happen is that they will stick with the V6 formula but probably have a more conventional (cheaper) design with a not as expensive hybrid system.

I pretty much agree. I do think a simpler solution will be a bit of "going back", but it is VERY limited and still provides the ability to provide proper PR spin with respect to not being out of sync with the future of vehicle power.

I would like to be surprised by something like a NA V8 + KERS solution, but I am not holding my breath. Those who might think NA V12 is on the horizon, please be prepared to be disappointed.

Richard

[S griffin]

We can’t keep going with the current engines. They haven’t exactly bought in loads of manufacturers. They may be good PR, but that’s about the only good thing and only justification for keeping them. We’ll have to see what the next generation of engines bring to the table

Going back to KERS isn’t a step forward necessarily, it was good back in the day, but it’s probably not in the best interest of F1 and the FIA anymore. We hopefully won’t have the V6 hybrids anymore. Hopefully the next ones will be more powerful. No chance of a return to V12s, that is probably fantasy

[Casper]

Originally Posted by S griffin

We can’t keep going with the current engines. They haven’t exactly bought in loads of manufacturers. They may be good PR, but that’s about the only good thing and only justification for keeping them. We’ll have to see what the next generation of engines bring to the table

Going back to KERS isn’t a step forward necessarily, it was good back in the day, but it’s probably not in the best interest of F1 and the FIA anymore. We hopefully won’t have the V6 hybrids anymore. Hopefully the next ones will be more powerful. No chance of a return to V12s, that is probably fantasy

Hopefully the next what will be more powerful? Why is more power needed, the current units can put out a lot more power if restrictions on use and fuel were to be lifted.

[P38 in workshop]

How about allowing new entrants provided they use crate engines from the main American manufacturers?V8's could run unsilenced and make lots of noise and very cheap.Compel existing entrants to stick with the current engines and see which technology wins.It might buy a bit of time while the FIA comes up with a scheme to deprive Formula E of the sole right to run single seat electric championships.Or maybe Liberty will invest in developing a sim racing app so that drivers can stay at home and appear to be racing at the classic circuits without much of a carbon footprint.

[Peter Mallett]

If you aren't very careful, your tongue will punch through your cheek!

[Sodemo]

Well, in a sense, the ACO has "gone backwards" with the hypercar rules as the hybrid aspect of them is in no way as developed as it was with LMP1 (as far as I can understand). This has then resulted in quite a number of teams expressing interest in entering.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Hopefully the next ones will be more powerful. No chance of a return to V12s, that is probably fantasy

What would be the level of power you hope for?

The current AMG M10 EQ Power+ is estimated to produce upwards of 900HP, +160HP from KERS.

To compare this with previous engines (estimated figures):

The BMW M12 was claimed to be at 1,400HP in race trim, but only for up to 4 laps. In race trim this was circa. 800HP.

V8s, V10s and V12s have never really delivered much in excess of 800HP at best, and most were closer to 750HP.

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

V8s, V10s and V12s have never really delivered much in excess of 800HP at best, and most were closer to 750HP.

The 2.4L Honda V8 produced 747hp despite being restricted to port-injection, therefore a more efficient direct-injected 3.2L V12 would produce well in excess of 995hp (3.2/2.4*747).

Reference:
https://www.racecar-engineering.com/...gine-revealed/

The figures for the 3.0 V10s in 2005 are generally considered to be around 950hp, so I'm not sure where you got a figure of 800hp from.

BMW quote the following figures:
2000 3.0 V10 810hp
2001 3.0 V10 880hp
2002 3.0 V10 895hp
2003 3.0 V10 940hp
2004 3.0 V10 950hp
2005 3.0 V10 >950hp (abandoned and Williams were supplied with 2004 engines again)
Source:
10 Years of BMW F1 Engines
by Mario Theissen, Markus Duesmann, et al.
BMW Group, Munich
http://sd-2.archive-host.com/membres...urs_BMW_F1.pdf

That's the figure 950hp for the 3.0 V10, straight from the horse's mouth.... A 3.2 V12 in 2025 should have little trouble producing >1000hp using the now permitted direct-injection and other techniques for improved efficiency.

It's only logical to remove the turbocharger and replace it by a doubling of displacement.

Do you really want a 1.0 V4 turbo hybrid Formula One car!? Red Bull Racing probably doesn't want that and probably not Ferrari either. Only Mercedes and Renault want that.

[Richard Casto]

Recent history (~87 and newer) has shown that NA displacement kept being reduced to limit overall power. Generally speaking, bespoke NA F1 racing engines can produce quite a lot of power vs displacement. It would be quite easy to use modern knowledge/concepts to create quite powerful V8, V10 or V12 engines. Its mostly a question of displacement, RPM and requisite fuel and air flow.

Richard

[S griffin]

Since the previous generation of turbos were outlawed, the NA engines have been restricted, but have been still been pretty quick, despite the FIA’s best efforts. Of course the engine rules changed quite a bit, but it was still good and then we KERS and hybrids come in. Will we see NAs come back? I suppose it could happen and could work too

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

How about allowing new entrants provided they use crate engines from the main American manufacturers?

What, like these things?



Unfortunately American stock-block V8s don't sound right (and are impossibly heavy -- 195kg for a Coyote! over twice the weight of a F1 3.0 V10), flatplane V8s like a Ferrari or a good old Judd Zytek F3000 engine sound so much better. Of course the American stock-blocks are solid road car engines, especially for the price.

However, as V8 Supercars shows, as you soon as you take the $5000 stock-block and machine it extensively, fit roller-bearings, custom cams, custom pistons, dry-sump etc, that racing conversion process costs the best part of $150,000 anyway... Far more than the original cost of the stock engine block! You may as well have designed and built a proper racing engine with an optimised stressed-member block & gear-driven cams in the first place -- it would cost about the same, and be much lighter!

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

What would be the level of power you hope for?

I love how you actually expect an answer from this particular poster. That's not how they operate. It's not possible to keep up a steady 50-100 post per day flow if distracted by actual conversation .

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by V8 Fireworks

......... as V8 Supercars shows, as you soon as you take the $5000 stock-block and machine it extensively, fit roller-bearings, custom cams, custom pistons, dry-sump etc, that racing conversion process costs the best part of $150,000 anyway... Far more than the original cost of the stock engine block! You may as well have designed and built a proper racing engine with an optimised stressed-member block & gear-driven cams in the first place -- it would cost about the same, and be much lighter!

Interesting analogy, thanks. We see the same in Historics where a crate V8 engine comes in and machining etc. takes it up to £50 to 70k.

That said if your self designed stressed engine was only $150k then it makes sense to go that route as far as attracting teams would be concerned. Manufacturers would no doubt be put off though.