Williams FW26 launch: BMW engine

[Adam43]

Not much to report so far on the engine front. there is a general comment from Mario Theissen on the new rules:
http://www.bmw.williamsf1.com/01-2EF...01/0501_01.4ml

Mario Theissen, williams-f1.com
We have to master complex tasks in order to achieve our goal of the World Championship title. The Sporting Code introduced in 2004 prescribes the use of a single engine for the entire Grand Prix weekend. This means that endurance is our priority. However, we also want to field the most powerful engine on the grid despite the new rules.

Not much new there.

However I picked up on this:

williams-f1.comThe front profiles of the car are augmented by a narrower sidepod footprint, enabled by revised cooling packaging, all assisting aerodynamic performance.

It seems in the comprimise stakes sero has won here too.

However, I think, BMW already have a reputation for producing an engine that can run hotter than some of the rivals. This clearly aids aero and top speed. Have they taken this to another limit?

[Try Hard]

I'd agree there. In my veiw the FW25 had bar far the smallest sidepods of the 2003 field. And it looks like they are smaller still.
Deffiently seems like BMW are able to run their engines really hot.

When it says footprint does that mean width as well as height?
If so, won't this affect the CoG? or is that just the polar moments of inertia? (weight closer to the centre line of the car = sharper responses).
I know it'll affect aero cause as adam stated above, it's a reduction in X-Sectional area, and therefore reduce the drag the car produces.

Regards
Ed

[Dino IV]

Footprint is in one plane, about width and length, not heigth.

Very noteworthy is also the engine cover, longer and higher. That may indicate a different airbox design. Instead of the more usual downward curve, it may be now more spherical, like a snail.

[Try Hard]

with the dorsal fin on the back to meet the box reg's right?

So when he says footprint, it means that the length and width of the sidepods is smaller? therefore freeing up space between the wheels for cleaner airflow?

Who ever said that there wasn't room for inovative thinking in the current regs.

Ed

[Try Hard]

you mean something like this for the cover?

[Adam43]

Nothing too revealing here, but this link provides the PS84 specification http://f1.racing-live.com/en/headlin...05165124.shtml

[mansellmania]

The airbox looks kinda like the jordan f16 style box end 99 imo.
Wich in turn looked a bit like the mp4-10 flat top airbox.
or am i greatly mistaken.

[Knowlesy]

Alright, so now Jordan are copying.

[slicktoast]

BMW engine, right. But, what about that nose!?

[Adam43]

:confused: http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...5&pagenumber=1

[MacMan]

I think the car does look very bulky but that is surely due to the new engine cover regs. Kinda reminds me of that Lego Williams you can buy or some other toy. Like I said in the other thread though, the more I see it the more I like it and I can bet you that BMW donk will be strong out of the box

[mansellmania]

Originally posted by MacMan
I think the car does look very bulky but that is surely due to the new engine cover regs. Kinda reminds me of that Lego Williams you can buy or some other toy. Like I said in the other thread though, the more I see it the more I like it and I can bet you that BMW donk will be strong out of the box

I still think Ferrari will make the benchmark F1 engine again.
Since 2001 theirs is stronger than the BMW.
Funny that some people still think BMW is the benchmark.
I did like the 'overtaking' button idea with more power.
But as it seems juan pablo dropped out of suzuka 2003 race with an old problem i think they went a bit conservative on the 2004 unit.

No rave revieuws after the few laps they did yesterday too.

[MacMan]

don't want to anger you here mansellmania but what does what I said have to do with what you are saying? I fail to see why you quoted me there. All I have said was I bet the BMW donk will be strong out of the box.
PLus about the rave reviews, the drivers only did 9 laps combined so give them time to find out what it can really do. They did both say it was very simialr to last years car and that was good according to them.

[mansellmania]

Originally posted by MacMan
don't want to anger you here mansellmania but what does what I said have to do with what you are saying? I fail to see why you quoted me there. All I have said was I bet the BMW donk will be strong out of the box.

Well it was indeed a follow up to what you think it will be strong out of the box.
With a note wether its reliable out of the box as well.
Juan did 14 laps wich 6 of them where on pace and i did not get the impression he was out of his mind excited about the cars pace or the engine.

Lets see how it fares againts the other cars from 7 till 13 january test.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by mansellmania
I still think Ferrari will make the benchmark F1 engine again.
Since 2001 theirs is stronger than the BMW.
Funny that some people still think BMW is the benchmark.

I'm not so sure, but then how can anyone not be so sure. Although I think most still think the BMW has the slight edge.

I think the BMW could still be the benchmark in terms of power. However if you factor in reliability and 'driveability' then it may not be. However if you factor in the BMW's ability to run quite hot then it could shift to BMW.

Originally posted by mansellmania
No rave revieuws after the few laps they did yesterday too.

However testing means nothing and any article that hypes up a car (with the possible exception of a Ferrari) is rubbish.

Originally posted by mansellmania
But as it seems juan pablo dropped out of suzuka 2003 race with an old problem i think they went a bit conservative on the 2004 unit.

hmmm, the odd blow up hasn't force BMW to be conservative before so why would this one race example do that now. I feel there is no proof that BMW have gone conservative. Any quotes from Theissen? or another part of the team?

[frostblade]

They've already been running that engine for a few weeks in the back of the FW25 in testing I think. Didn't Gene say that it was the biggest step he had seen?

[mansellmania]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
.

I think the BMW could still be the benchmark in terms of power. However if you factor in reliability and 'driveability' then it may not be. However if you factor in the BMW's ability to run quite hot then it could shift to BMW.

However testing means nothing and any article that hypes up a car (with the possible exception of a Ferrari) is rubbish.

hmmm, the odd blow up hasn't force BMW to be conservative before so why would this one race example do that now. I feel there is no proof that BMW have gone conservative. Any quotes from Theissen? or another part of the team?

Eversince shumi outran ralf at brasil 2001 its fair to say ferrari engine is the benchmark in horsepower.
Maybe they dont scream it as loud as bmw loves to do, ferrari rather beats them on the track.
It was not just suzuka wich was a problem, Juan also dropped out of Austria with a defect engine from a leading position.

The reliability vs the ferrari lacks and together with williams admitting the suzuka 2003 failure was an old, known problem id say they had some good discussion about the 2004 engine unit.
Wether it runs hotter i dont dont know. Could be.
But wasnt it renault who set the benchmark for running engines way hotter some years ago?
Ford took that to aproximatly 130 degrees clesius.
i doubt BMW runs hotter than that.

I think testingtimes mean nothing however there are some things to learn about testdays like cars starting to errupt in flames and articles that hype up minardis as ferrari beaters well, it is your prerogative to believe in them Adam.

Gene was quoted that he never had such an advanced engine (the bmw 2004 engine) but he didnt say about pwer or reliability.
Perhaps it was such advanced that from now on no more silly small leaks will blow up engines?
He did say that it wasnt as powerfull as the last unit used at the suzuka race,that they hoped to be at a similar power level come Melbourne GP.
That piece is page 4 or 5 from the xmass edition of Autosport.

[Adam43]

Originally posted by mansellmania
I think testingtimes mean nothing however there are some things to learn about testdays like cars starting to errupt in flames and articles that hype up minardis as ferrari beaters well, it is your prerogative to believe in them Adam.

I, clearly, would not believe an article that says Minardi are Ferrari beaters. You are taking my posts from the wrong side. Surely that is not difficult to see. I am not trying to put Ferrari down (that would be foolish as they win all the time!) I just wonder about the relative engine performances.

A few things to consider. The new one engine rule will temper the advancement of power. So comparing whether an engine is more powerfut than last year isn't what we are doing, we are comparing the different engines. (Which is difficult).

Top speeds are not directly a measure of engine power. There are aerodynamics, gearing and other factors to consider. Take Monza last year. Montoya was running a lot more wing that M Schumacher.

What temperature Ford runs is immaterial, because even if high they can't combine that with other good characteristics. Also Renault pushed most aspects of engine design years ago, however again surely all that matters when discussing new cars is the current situation. Daimler-Benz set the trend for more powerful engines over a hundred years ago!

[mansellmania]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore


A few things to consider. The new one engine rule will temper the advancement of power. So comparing whether an engine is more powerfut than last year isn't what we are doing, we are comparing the different engines. (Which is difficult).

Top speeds are not directly a measure of engine power. There are aerodynamics, gearing and other factors to consider. Take Monza last year. Montoya was running a lot more wing that M Schumacher.

But i do consider different wingsettngs, gearing and aerodynamic efficiency.
Irvine always said the ferraris have plenty of power, but lack aero efficiency vs the then superb mclarens.
Everyone said the mercs where benchmarks but having heard what irvine said i wasnt so sure.

Off course there are lots of variables to consider, but the 2001 ferrari engine outpacing a BMW engine wich was using red area revs to gain 'overtaking power ' and still ran behind marranellos finest on such a long stretch of very uphill going tarmac was a big, big win for ferrari.(and superimpressive)
Watching that happening i had all good faith in the season to come for the red team.

This year the ferrari was comfortably the fastest down most speedtraps and regardless of the wingsettings and aero efficiency, it has to come down to horsepower.
Perhaps wel read next years xmass issue that the ferrari engine was indeed benchmarking all the way as autosport isnt so fast in praising foreign country engineering.

But they did with Ford and i remember a nice intervieuw with Nick Hayes and all the comparisment tables.. Ford was the 2nd best engine in terms of power and for sure the lightest and very driveable.
It was all about how he got his engines to run so incredibble hot etc.
gonna see if i can find back wich issue that was, nice read and i recommend it if you havent read it before.

[Adam43]

I don't think the Ferrari was 'comfortably fastest down most speed traps'.

And I don't think Autosport has a problem praising foreign country engineering especially as Ferrari is probably the favourite team there. Also isn't BMW foreign for those hacks at Autosport?

[Try Hard]

Personally, in the power stakes i belive that the BMW was better. This is mainly because the ferrari was considered to be the most aero efficient desgin last year, and sill the williams' were up with them in terms of straight line speed. To be honest though, any difference there was/is between the engine's will probably be very marginal, no more than 5 bhp I expect.

With regards to reliability, Ferrari has it hands down...

Temp wise, not so sure but i would reckon the bmw was hotter, based on the size of the sidepods (and hence radiator's), the william's were certainly lower in height than the ferrari's (even with the F2003-GA's sculpted section's).
Running the engine hotter is more of an aero issue than a power creating one, as it means less cooling is needed to stop the engine going "poof". This gives a double aero benifit, firstly cutting the amount of bodywork in fontal area, and secondly cutting drag from air passing through the radiators.

To be honest, it's all about which factor's you consider the most important...

Ed

[Mr V]

Originally posted by mansellmania
Eversince shumi outran ralf at brasil 2001 its fair to say ferrari engine is the benchmark in horsepower.

But as JPM overtook Michael, at the end of the straight, wouldn't that throw back the ball into BMW's court?

Rafe behind Michael doesn't suggest to me that the Ferrari has a faster engine. JPM that close to Michael, and not able to attempt a pass, is a more likely comparison.

[Mr V]

BTW, wasn't the Brazil race your talking about in 2002?

Just wondering.

[mansellmania]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
I don't think the Ferrari was 'comfortably fastest down most speed traps'.

isn't BMW foreign for those hacks at Autosport?

You see the speedtrapspeeds most of the time during qual and most practise sessions as well.
Nice feature while watching your fav sport.

Perhaps i didnt make it clear that they usually talk uplifting/hyping with british based teams.. BMW is foreign indeed but contributor to the biggest F1 team in the UK.

You shouldv read the post 2002 hungary issue where ferrari secured their 4th consecutive worldconstructors-title... it was mentioned in a small corner somewhere.

[Dani Filth]

well .. a mclaren fan could argue ...
about engines . i think the Ferrari and BMW units are on par