V6 Engines for 2014

Spritle · 22 Jun 2011, 17:21 (Ref:2904330)

Ratification pending although no mention of the turbo issue in this article:

http://en.espnf1.com/fia/motorsport/story/52179.html

But it is mentioned here:

http://www.pitpass.com/43984-F1-dela...-green-formula

nobster · 22 Jun 2011, 17:26 (Ref:2904334)

And once again the FIA changes its mind....

GolddustMini · 22 Jun 2011, 17:32 (Ref:2904337)

when the prancing horse stamps its feet......

Joe Taylor · 22 Jun 2011, 18:30 (Ref:2904363)

Why are they now forcing V6 engines? Can't they just say 1.6L turbocharged with any number of cylinders you want?

blaffer · 22 Jun 2011, 18:47 (Ref:2904371)

Two important victories for Montezemolo in only a few weeks time: blown diffuser ban and V6-engines.

TF110 · 22 Jun 2011, 19:21 (Ref:2904392)

I don't see that, it's probably cheaper and easier this way. I'll laugh when teams start to say they were in favor of the 4 cylinder engine. Because none were, not even Renault.

knighty · 22 Jun 2011, 19:41 (Ref:2904404)

I think this is an excellent compromise deal for the following reasons:

1) everyone should agree
2) Bernie will like the noise - and so will the fans
3) the chassis designers will like the torsional rigidity of a V6
4) the engine designers will have an easier time making the thing last
5) the aero boys will have twin exhausts for aero blowing
6) The manufacturers will have something road relevant

the only downside is the cost, but the current engines really are not relevant to mainstream automotive, and this has been the way for about 20 years unfortunatley......despite the late change I really do believe this is for the better

REALIST · 22 Jun 2011, 20:30 (Ref:2904424)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knighty

I think this is an excellent compromise deal for the following reasons:

1) everyone should agree
2) Bernie will like the noise - and so will the fans
3) the chassis designers will like the torsional rigidity of a V6
4) the engine designers will have an easier time making the thing last
5) the aero boys will have twin exhausts for aero blowing
6) The manufacturers will have something road relevant

the only downside is the cost, but the current engines really are not relevant to mainstream automotive, and this has been the way for about 20 years unfortunatley......despite the late change I really do believe this is for the better

What is there about F1 that is truly relevant to mainstream automotive?

grantp · 22 Jun 2011, 20:37 (Ref:2904428)

Quote:

Originally Posted by REALIST

What is there about F1 that is truly relevant to mainstream automotive?

An engineering and management training ground perhaps. That's about it.

Wel, apart from some influence over worldwide brand awareness.

Gingers4Justice · 22 Jun 2011, 20:45 (Ref:2904433)

Quote:

Originally Posted by REALIST

What is there about F1 that is truly relevant to mainstream automotive?

It's F1 trying to plug the gap left by the demise of sportscars.

Formula One doesn't need to be about road relevance, nor should it be. It's meant to be about building cars to go round a track as quickly as possible. Nothing more, nothing less.

It's the FIA's job to ensure it's done safely and (sort of) affordably. Again, nothing more, nothing less.

I'm not sure what Todt is trying to do here with motor sport, he seems to have one policy and one policy only - to downsize everything in every single category. And with the FIA announcing the WEC, where does any category have its USP?

JAG · 22 Jun 2011, 20:57 (Ref:2904439)

Quote:

Originally Posted by REALIST

What is there about F1 that is truly relevant to mainstream automotive?

It doesn't need any road relevance, but rather than Ferrari vs Mercedes vs Renault, you'd have Red Bull vs Coca-Cola vs Sony.

strider · 22 Jun 2011, 22:53 (Ref:2904506)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knighty

I think this is an excellent compromise deal for the following reasons:

1) everyone should agree
2) Bernie will like the noise - and so will the fans
3) the chassis designers will like the torsional rigidity of a V6
4) the engine designers will have an easier time making the thing last
5) the aero boys will have twin exhausts for aero blowing
6) The manufacturers will have something road relevant

the only downside is the cost, but the current engines really are not relevant to mainstream automotive, and this has been the way for about 20 years unfortunately......despite the late change I really do believe this is for the better

Yup, good news as far as I'm concerned.

Try Hard · 23 Jun 2011, 03:40 (Ref:2904558)

Quote:

Originally Posted by knighty

5) the aero boys will have twin exhausts for aero blowing

*cough* only if it's twin turbo...

wnut · 23 Jun 2011, 05:45 (Ref:2904580)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Try Hard

*cough* only if it's twin turbo...

If there is only 1 then there is no point in having a V6 - noooooo...

knighty · 23 Jun 2011, 07:57 (Ref:2904617)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Try Hard

*cough* only if it's twin turbo...

correct, perhaps I was getting carried away there, there is no evidence yet weather it will be single or twin turbo, there are plentty of arguments for going either way, but I know this (twin) was the preferred route in the 1.5 days for tunnel blowing reasons, but they were running ground effect too and this is also now a very controversial issue in itself, hence the I4's became obsolete compared to the V6's......anyway.........

I'm a chartered engineer and I have worked in the automotive powertrain design and development industry for 12 years now, a blend of both race and road engine R&D, I'm currently in the micro (small) hybrid sector, and I must say that due to F1 being totally non road relevant the V10 and V8 NA years there has been hardly no technology handover between the road and race engine sectors, despite all the bull that the manufacturers feed you.......then the FIA introduce KERS and 1.6 turbos and for the last year or so I'm presonally experiencing a technology transfer between both F1 race and road engine industries.........so with F1's new direction F1 IS now road relevant, but was not a few years back.......the FIA are doing a good job in my book, particularly Jean Todt.

Marbot · 23 Jun 2011, 16:42 (Ref:2904808)

My understanding is that modern turbos have all but eliminated turbo lag due to the use of things like variable vane and twin scroll technology. If it hasn't been completely eliminated, then it's up to the clever people at the engine factories to find solutions to that problem.

Whether or not they have one, two or whatever number of turbos, I'm sure that they will seek to make them as efficient as possible anyways. Having the need for fewer turbos would be a step in that direction.

Pleased to see that V6 engine is being looked at (less room for turbos though).

**Adam43** · 22 Jun 2011, 20:41 (Ref:2904431)

I'm pleased with this.

Oh no, that's wrong. I hate this. F1 is a joke. A massive U-Turn. Just like when they went back to slicks. A joke. Just like when they banned traction control again after allowing it. The ban on refueling - a joke. More overtaking, pah, a ridiculous change in direction.

JeremySmith · 23 Jun 2011, 02:42 (Ref:2904553)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam43

I'm pleased with this.

Oh no, that's wrong. I hate this. F1 is a joke. A massive U-Turn. Just like when they went back to slicks. A joke. Just like when they banned traction control again after allowing it. The ban on refueling - a joke. More overtaking, pah, a ridiculous change in direction.

I might have known...

F1 is rubbish and I am taking up lawn balling as this pastmhytime is way too stressful...

Complain to the the management if you have any issues...

P38 in workshop · 22 Jun 2011, 22:04 (Ref:2904476)

Once upon a time F1 engines were 1.5 litres and turbocharged.Then somebody decided that these were too complex and expensive as well as too powerful;so they were eliminated.Their replacements were larger and had more cylinders and actually cost more to make but they were held to be good because the wise men said so.After a few years and a reduction in capacity and the number of cylinders,not to mention a rev limit,the FIA have decided that smaller turbocharged engines are a good idea.When this had been announced,Ferrari-who receive a bigger share of the money than anybody else and who appear to have a right of veto on rule changes-got grumpy and now the FIA are allowing more cylinders.Will they all live happily ever after?

wnut · 22 Jun 2011, 22:33 (Ref:2904496)

Quote:

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

Once upon a time F1 engines were 1.5 litres and turbocharged.Then somebody decided that these were too complex and expensive as well as too powerful;so they were eliminated.Their replacements were larger and had more cylinders and actually cost more to make but they were held to be good because the wise men said so.After a few years and a reduction in capacity and the number of cylinders,not to mention a rev limit,the FIA have decided that smaller turbocharged engines are a good idea.When this had been announced,Ferrari-who receive a bigger share of the money than anybody else and who appear to have a right of veto on rule changes-got grumpy and now the FIA are allowing more cylinders.Will they all live happily ever after?

At least the V6 is the right architecture for a turbo engine.
I4 is just plain wrong - I3 may have some merit.

Sodemo · 22 Jun 2011, 22:46 (Ref:2904500)

I'm happier with V6 turbo than a straight 4 turbo. However i'd rather not have turbo's at all, i'd rather have a mixture of V8, V10 and V12 engines.

TugaF1 · 6 Jul 2011, 11:10 (Ref:2922773)

Many of us are wondering if the sound of the new engines will be up to challenge and will keep us all listening to the burst of power...well according to some of the experts of F1, they should keep their dazzling sound...

check the news here @autosport

Marbot · 6 Jul 2011, 11:16 (Ref:2922777)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TugaF1

Many of us are wondering if the sound of the new engines will be up to challenge and will keep us all listening to the burst of power...well according to some of the experts of F1, they should keep their dazzling sound...

check the news here @autosport

Yeah. Posted that about an hour ago.

Crazy_Pigal · 6 Jul 2011, 11:32 (Ref:2922790)

Just read the article in Autosport, interesting what Bob White is saying about the fuel flow limit:

"The rules look like they are heading towards a rev limit of 15,000rpm, and the fuel flow limit is intended to drive the operating speed of these engines up towards the upper end of that range, rather than the lower,"

If you have a blanket fuel flow limit the lower revving high boost engine will always produce more power, lower friction higher efficiency etc.

However if they limit the fuel per cylinder per rev then the faster they rev the engine they can use more fuel & produce more power, so the engine can now use the full rev range, it still has to be tuned to maximun efficiency at that speed in order to maximise power.

If this is how the regs end up looking then I like it.... sure it'll be some time before any of us actually get to see the details, so let the speculation run.

Regarding Vee angle, absolutely sure it will be fixed, guessing at 90°, I'd prefer 120°, as lower always looks better.

Marbot · 6 Jul 2011, 12:10 (Ref:2922809)

Unlike naturally aspirated engines, turbo engines don't rely on rpms for power gain, just turbo boost. An example is Ford Cosworths GBA 1.5 litre V6 turbo F1 engine, which delivered over 1000 bhp at just 12,000 rpm. But if you have a fuel limit, then you have to rely more heavily on your engines ability to make power at higher rpms, just like a naturally aspirated engine does.

The Cosworth GBA engine had a V angle of 120 degrees, whereas Honda's RA engine had a V angle of 80 degrees. If there is just a single turbo, then I'm guessing this is going atop of the engine (like the Audi V6 turbo in the R18). But more important aerodynamic requirements (undercut sidepods) may require something entirely different.

Ford Cosworth GBA:

http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_artic...-6-engine.aspx

It seems a shame that Cosworth are looking very unlikely to be building another one.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Formula Renault 3.5 2012-2014 car specs	jondownunder	National & International Single Seaters	14	26 Aug 2011 22:32
Russian GP - 2014	Cougar	Formula One	51	10 Nov 2010 18:10
Saab in the WRC for 2014?	I Rosputnik	Rallying & Rallycross	4	14 Jul 2010 00:09
V8Supercar Round #1 in "2014"	Peddler	Australasian Touring Cars.	14	6 Dec 2007 12:12
How superior are turbocharged engines compaired to NA engines in sportscar racing?	chernaudi	Sportscar & GT Racing	16	27 Dec 2006 18:07