Return of the V12

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Greem

I've been called some names in my time but I don't think I've ever been referred to as "righteous"

I apologise if referring to V12 engines as "meh" was a trigger for anyone. I loved the V12 cars, just as I loved the DFV and the crazy H and W and flat engines that predated them, and the V10 and inline 12s and all the other things people have run in F1. Some were shockingly bad, some were magical.

But... Those days are gone. By all means advocate for simpler powertrains, but look forward, not back. Or look at now, because despite the massive cost and complexity the PU system they run at the moment is a thing of beauty in terms of the outrageous amount of power it puts out per kilo of fuel converted. And it does it without shredding eardrums (although trust me, up close they make an epic noise, especially when you're so close you can feel the air move around you).

Slightly righteous response follows though: someone who's got or is getting into F1 in this era is going to design and produce the next step change in powertrain technology. Let them look ahead rather than forcing them to look only back.

I've covered all the above in previous posts explaining why it's actually the hybrids that are going to be the backwards solution looking forwards. The ultimate step in powertrain evolution is no combustion engine at all. However because a heavy battery is not suitable for the ultimate formula racing car for quite a considerable time and hydrogen is probably be the current formula on steroids in terms of cost, weight and complexity, those aren't realistic options for the time being.

Going for a sort of the middle of the road approach, with no road relevancy for the around 2030 era, but which does have all the drawbacks of an middle of the road approach, sounds like get "the drawbacks but not the rewards" kind of solution to me.

[S griffin]

I see no point to the hybrids anymore. IIRC they were supposed to bring in the manufacturers, yet the only one that entered was Honda and now that’s going. Just shows why motorsport should not rely on manufacturers as the be all end all. The Hybrids are a complicated piece of kit anyway and hasn’t exactly cut costs from what I have seen. And really F1 has no need to be road relevant, it should be a great series in it’s own right

[Pandamasque]

I'm not sure the manufacturers even know what they want anymore. Case in point: the new IMSA sports car class LMDh to be introduced in 2023. It was rumoured that most manufacturers involved opposed the hybridisation, while others, namely Ford, insisted. IMSA went for spec low power KERS as a token gesture. And now Ford that was on the cusp of entering has suddenly gone very quiet
I feel like trends change too quickly for rule-makers to keep up, as they have to consider transition periods and development time/expense involved.

Originally Posted by Taxi645

We end up at 641kg minimum weight. In other words 127 kg (!) lighter than the 2022 regulations.

It's probably not that simple, but I get the point.

Does anyone know how far the current cars are under the current weight limit with all the ballast out?
As we saw many times this season, weight is also detrimental to safety. I noticed on multiple occasions big accidents in unexpected places with cars surprisingly traversing large run-off areas and hitting the barriers hard.

[P38 in workshop]

I seem to remember that Renault wouldn't have stuck around without a move to hybrids. As for Ford and racing programmes,I suspect Ford are on their way to obscurity,or being subsumed by VW.They have gone from being one of the world's largest and most significant car companies to being a fringe player in most markets.In Europe they only seem to succeed with small cars and have abandoned anything above Focus sized and the American operation is utterly dependent on the F150 with a few other things as window dressing for the dealers.


The notion of reverting to pure internal combustion engines is a little like trying to promote cigarettes in social terms and while both used to happen in Formula 1-they don't any more.In related news,I read a piece by somebody called Rebecca Myers in today's Sunday Times which focused on the imminent BBC Sports Personality of the Year.She said that Lewis Hamilton's tax affairs make him less than popular and to quote her words "There is understandable anger at the fact that he chooses to live where he does and not pay taxes in the UK." This is in spite of her own paper stating a few weeks ago that he is one of the 5,000 highest payers of tax in the UK.It also said that he pays direct withholding taxes in a number of jurisdictions in addition in the same issue.


Later in her column she switches to eco mode and criticises Formula 1 for adding 256,551 tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere in 2018.I suppose she must have done some research to arrive at this figure but I saw no mention of the offsetting that has been going on since 1997.


I understand that most newspapers have had to make economies in recent years and this seems to be an instance of dealing with the aftermath.In the past the Sunday Times employed sports writers of a different calibre and had much to do with pursuing Lance Armstrong when he was denying all forms of pharmaceutical assistance.These days we get a different sort of scribbler and there is a risk she might be regarded as leaving a trail that future researchers rely on for their endeavours.Which could be used to suppress motorsport in general.


I often wonder how much CO2 is generated by the thousands of cars and buses transporting away fans to football matches every weekend of the season.What seems clear is that racing with a power unit such as we have now has a much better chance of being around in ten years time than a return to old tech and fans need to ask if they would rather listen to a turbo hybrid or stand in the countryside in silence with nothing going on.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

Later in her column she switches to eco mode and criticises Formula 1 for adding 256,551 tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere in 2018.

If she did her research correctly, she'd find that the share of CO2 emissions by actual F1 cars going around the track is negligible compared emissions produced by travel/shipping. So I'd say 20 years ago with fewer rounds and most races in Europe, F1 was greener!

But in today's world "optics" > facts.

[Adam43]

Today’s world?

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Today’s world?

I don't know if this is the place to have an argument comparing how "alternative facts", populism, corporate, foreign govt and other agendas influence decision making in global powers now vs other times in the past.

[Adam43]

Why would we want an argument?

It’s probably always been around, but the way it has been communicated has changed.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

The notion of reverting to pure internal combustion engines is a little like trying to promote cigarettes in social terms and while both used to happen in Formula 1-they don't any more.

Originally Posted by Pandamasque

If she did her research correctly, she'd find that the share of CO2 emissions by actual F1 cars going around the track is negligible compared emissions produced by travel/shipping. So I'd say 20 years ago with fewer rounds and most races in Europe, F1 was greener!

But in today's world "optics" > facts.

Like Pandamasque says, the real CO2 producer in F1 is all the logistics of getting all the stuff and people around the world. F1's goal is to be completely carbon neutral in 2030. In that context for CO2 neutrality, it is completely and utterly irrelevant if the cars run their synthetic fuel in atmospheric engine's or hybrid turbo's, because considering the total energy use the difference is going to be negligible and it will be CO2 neutral because of synthetic fuel anyway.


So for the sole purpose of windows dressing you going to accept:

- An engine with little road relevance because by 2030 there won't be many hybrids sold (at least not the F1 variety). Due to batteries becoming increasingly cheaper, more energy dense and with less rare materials, the market will be mostly split up between EV's and cheap ICE's where EV's aren't possible.
- A very complex engine that needs large and trained teams to operate.
- A very expensive engine.
- An engine that facilities unconstructive politics in decision making and competitiveness.
- An engine that makes it hard for new manufacturers to enter.
- An engine that makes it hard for teams to switch engine manufacturers.
- A much heavier engine leading to even larger and heavier cars.
- An engine where you don't know what you're watching because you don't know the battery state of each driver.
- An engine that forces drivers to fool around with too many button and modes too often.
- A worse sounding engine (again I'm not suggesting going back to former sound levels).


That quite a high price to pay for window dressing, especially when knowing you could run the atmospheric engines on completely CO2 neutral synthetic fuel as well.

[P38 in workshop]

A small price to pay if the alternative is a ban on motorsport.Just hope the anti-motorsport faction doesn't do the calculation about all the pollution from transport and workforce commuting and goes for a ban on all of it, even Formula E.


To borrow a phrase form one of my favourite commentators on automobile matters the news of a return to V12's will be on the website- www.notgonnahappen.com .

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

A small price to pay if the alternative is a ban on motorsport.Just hope the anti-motorsport faction doesn't do the calculation about all the pollution from transport and workforce commuting and goes for a ban on all of it, even Formula E.

That's a big if.

[chillibowl]

Its not just window dressing though and the facts are the optics....rather hundreds of millions watch the race and not the teams fly around the world.

What they do on the race track is what matters to people and as such thats where they need to make their statement.

You take a knee on tv because thats where it has maximum impact imo.thats where you make it relevant.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Its not just window dressing though and the facts are the optics....rather hundreds of millions watch the race and not the teams fly around the world.

What they do on the race track is what matters to people and as such thats where they need to make their statement.

You take a knee on tv because thats where it has maximum impact imo.thats where you make it relevant.

And you do that by picking an engine that is less road relevant by then in relation to the billions of atmospheric ICE's around the world than the alternative while running CO2 neutral fuel anyway?

Hybrids might be considered green and forward thinking by some now, but it won't be by 2025-2030. So, as said, you get all the drawbacks without the advantage. That's the mistake you're making. You're taking what is considered green and innovative now (or more like a few years ago) and assuming it will still be so 10 years later.

Read up on LFP, LFMP, LNMO, NMCA batteries and then I'm not even talking about longer term solid state and other chemistries. Hybrids will make increasingly less sense.

[P38 in workshop]

It isn't just CO2 neutral fuel,if indeed such a thing exists.The focus will be on the CO2 emissions of the entire business as that is a far greater number.The current participants should be thankful that Max Mosley had the foresight to offset back in the nineties.


I have a tiny bit of knowledge about the environmental cost of battery production and it tells me that it isn't particularly clean or harmless to the environment or the people extracting the materials.It is correct to say that in the long term hybrids won't make sense,but it won't be the electric part that gets dumped.Enjoy what we have while we still have it.


The future may be solar powered cars with no batteries.

[Pandamasque]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

A small price to pay if the alternative is a ban on motorsport.Just hope the anti-motorsport faction doesn't do the calculation about all the pollution from transport and workforce commuting and goes for a ban on all of it, even Formula E.


To borrow a phrase form one of my favourite commentators on automobile matters the news of a return to V12's will be on the website- www.notgonnahappen.com .

Then they'd have to ban things like football and... vacations. Those aren't strictly necessary either.

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

The future may be solar powered cars with no batteries.

So... no night races, I guess.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by P38 in workshop

It isn't just CO2 neutral fuel,if indeed such a thing exists.The focus will be on the CO2 emissions of the entire business as that is a far greater number.The current participants should be thankful that Max Mosley had the foresight to offset back in the nineties.


I have a tiny bit of knowledge about the environmental cost of battery production and it tells me that it isn't particularly clean or harmless to the environment or the people extracting the materials.It is correct to say that in the long term hybrids won't make sense,but it won't be the electric part that gets dumped.Enjoy what we have while we still have it.


The future may be solar powered cars with no batteries.

Geothermal and slot cars would seem to be the way to go.

AS far as the present cars go:

Cut the weight back to 650kg, cut the fuel capacity by 5 litres (can then crow how efficient the cars are), dump the fuel flow meters, reduce the wings, and see how many of the cars are still running around with hybrid systems to save on fuel use or gain performance. None, hybrid systems don't stack up in any calculation, they are simply not worth the weight that is added, unless you force the weight up to accommodate them, and then mandate axle loads because they are not even worth their weight in ballast.

[Adam43]

You can only crow on the fuel efficiency if you cut the capacity by 8.5 litres.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Adam43

You can only crow on the fuel efficiency if you cut the capacity by 8.5 litres.

[Adam43]

[S griffin]

For me the hybrid turbos have probably had their day, but I don’t see any reason to return to V12s either. They can run V8s or V6s for all I care, just as the engine is loud enough and easy enough to run rather than the complicated kit we have got now. It’s time to go back to conventional engines like they had before, even if hybrids have become more of a thing in motorsport

[Casper]

You can debate this stuff for as long as you like but the facts that are not in dispute is that ICE engines are being made ILLEGAL for road use in Europe by LEGISLATION and motor racing has no decisions to make, it will be made for us whether we like it or not. If the whole thing was turned around and electric had been the norm for the last 100+ years and now the push was to introduce ICE everyone would be up in arms because the things are so damned noisy. People don't like change and motor racing is no different. All the wishing and teeth gnashing about how the world is going to end with motors that make no noise is just a refusal to embrace change but it is coming whether we accept it or not. A few will say that they will refuse to watch but they won't be missed because others who embrace the change will take their place.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Casper

You can debate this stuff for as long as you like but the facts that are not in dispute is that ICE engines are being made ILLEGAL for road use in Europe by LEGISLATION and motor racing has no decisions to make, it will be made for us whether we like it or not. If the whole thing was turned around and electric had been the norm for the last 100+ years and now the push was to introduce ICE everyone would be up in arms because the things are so damned noisy. People don't like change and motor racing is no different. All the wishing and teeth gnashing about how the world is going to end with motors that make no noise is just a refusal to embrace change but it is coming whether we accept it or not. A few will say that they will refuse to watch but they won't be missed because others who embrace the change will take their place.

I think the shear impracticality and stupidity of this "LEGISLATION" will be self defeating in the end, and there will be a place for efficient ICE when all the dust clears and the green lies have been dissected.

[P38 in workshop]

Originally Posted by wnut

I think the shear impracticality and stupidity of this "LEGISLATION" will be self defeating in the end, and there will be a place for efficient ICE when all the dust clears and the green lies have been dissected.

If you can debunk any of the green "lies",please go ahead and do so as it will save a huge amount of disruption.If you can create a more efficient ICE than the current Formula 1 power units,great wealth awaits you.It took a lot of very capable engineers to make the move from an efficiency level of around 30% to the current 50% so there is still plenty of headroom.Problem is electric is doing better with no tailpipe emissions.Could be worse,the old style steam railway locomotives were a huge amount less efficient,started fires in the country with sparks and could only run where lines took them.People get very nostalgic about those too.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

I think the shear impracticality and stupidity of this "LEGISLATION" will be self defeating in the end, and there will be a place for efficient ICE when all the dust clears and the green lies have been dissected.

There will be no ICE more efficient or not because the legislators are going to get their way which is ZERO tail pipe emissions and not REDUCED tail pipe emissions. Zero means just that and reduced does not go anywhere near zero. Sorry to be so pragmatic about it but there is huge misunderstanding out there about this point.

[Pandamasque]

This is a bit UK-centric but a lot of the into and Harry Metcalfe's conclusions on the current ICE v EV trend are quite interesting: https://youtu.be/1CUA2imRYRM

I'm wondering what happens to markets that just don't have convenient charging infrastructure and will not have it for probably decades, which however still account for a lot of sales of "global cars" by big OEMs.

For example, I live in a historic centre in a city of about 5 million, where there's practically no parking infrastructure, let alone charging! And you can't have one without the other. On top of that, a lot of old buildings have unstable power supply because the infrastructure is from the middle of the 20th century when a household owned a fridge and a radio, plus some light bulbs. And they're building more and more apartment blocks in between the old buildings further exacerbating all kinds of infrastructure issues. For most there will be no charging spots at home, not in 2025, not in 2030, and probably not in 2040. So the only option is to regularly hang out at a gas station. How many of those will be required to recharge close to a million cars?
I don't think my case is unique.

Where the power comes from where I live is *coughs black smoke* a whole different conversation.

I get that this is somewhat offtopic, but if racing organizers are to continue seeking "road relevance" or whatever the OEM PR departments demand, this global mess of a technology transition will be a factor in racing too.