New regs ----good or bad for F1?

[Peralta]

I personally think they are really bad especially the engine formula. 4 cylinders? Are they taking the ****? Team orders is legal now so now we will have fixed races. Bad enough we have KERS but this is ridiculous. Surely we can come up with a better formula and regulations.

[Rgms320]

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=42697

Per WMSC:

4 banger, high pressure GDI, 12,000 rpm, "...extensive energy management and energy recovery systems..."

"...35% reduction in fuel consumption..."

Nothing about turbocharging, but "...maintaining current levels of performance..." would imply such.

They might make 750 hp, but the four bangers won't deliver the drivability of the current engines. So I'd expect to see a weight reduction in the cars to go along with the new engines.

Better or worse? I'd say worse, but we won't know until they're up and running. This is the direction that F1 wants to take, though, so this is what we're going to see. I'm keeping an open mind.

There sure is going to be a lot of R&D expense to develop the engines, the KERS, and the TERS though. I hope they've figured out how they're going to pay for the new systems.

I wonder if the new engine system formula will bring in any new manufacturers?

[Rgms320]

I just noticed this one, from the article cited above:

Amendments to the 2012 Technical Regulations:

The inclusion of fuels produced from biomass

This is a biggie, and something I hadn't heard of before. Is F1 moving to ethanol?

[Jimmy Magnusson]

If real development is allowed, I think it'll actually be very interesting to see what performance they can squeeze out of those tiny things.

[Jamesy-18]

Bad. KERS is the only good thing IMO.

[Marbot]

Unfortunately F1 is having to follow the trends that are taking place in other industries (aircraft etc), even the car manufacturers are generally getting into the 'down-sizing' thing in a big way. Whether or not it's all good for F1 isn't really that important. What is important is that F1 comes across as being sponsor friendly, and hanging on to relatively high capacity, thirsty V8 engines, with not a hint of 'green' about them, isn't going to draw them in.

I too would prefer V12s, V10s etc, but the times they are a changing.

As for the "driveabilty" of these 1.6 turbo engines. What you must remember is that naturally aspirated engines are generally lacking in torque (only about 200ft/lbs peak for a V8 2.4) and the addition of a turbo charger will not only increase peak torque levels to well above what a 2.4 V8 would produce, but it would also increase it to much higher levels throughout the entire rpm range. Particularly now that turbo technology (variable vane etc) has moved on quite a lot. So there shouldn't be any more of that turbo lag that turbo's used to be famous for.

[Spritle]

Lawn movers with movable rear wings, probably at 4-5 seconds a lap slower overall when you factor in the Pirellis. Is this what we really want from the "pinnacle?" GP2 and lower series, EVEN NASCAR will be dusting F1 lap times. I can hear the snickering now...

Will the teams be flying in single engine prop planes or walking to save fuel as well? This is really silly and will cost a fortune to implement, what happened to cost cutting? Just abolish motor racing if the stupid environment is so important to the greenies. I COULD CARE LESS!! I want super fast cars burning massive amounts of carbon fuels, making a deafening roar and dumping massive amounts of carbon into the air. Bring it on, it's only 18-20 bloody races with a handful of cars. Get over it already! The carbon footprint of the protests in London was probably bigger than an F1 race!

All I know is the day that F1 becomes the slowest road series is the day I'm done. Four cylinders, my bloody Hyundai has 4 cylinders, what a disgrace!

[gttouring]

it could work out.
but smaller capacity turbo? and rev limit.
why not just rev limit the engine and put a turbo on it? or keep the capacity as is?
oh than the field would likely sound like Cosworth XFE's and Bernie would never want that...
the potential torque spread and turbo popping etc, can make these quite fun- and small eh? what is the car ultimately going to do with the tight wrap engine covers-
of course turbo fours is nice for a change, i would still rather an more open formula with max capacities set rather than almost every regulation...but F1 love or hate the details is always fantastic-

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Spritle

Bring it on, it's only 18-20 bloody races with a handful of cars. Get over it already! The carbon footprint of the protests in London was probably bigger than an F1 race!

All I know is the day that F1 becomes the slowest road series is the day I'm done. Four cylinders, my bloody Hyundai has 4 cylinders, what a disgrace!

The 1.6 turbo engines will produce around 600bhp and more useable torque, and with KERS they will produce around 750bhp in total. They will probably weigh less and need to carry around less fuel. In all probability the cars lap times will be quicker than they currently are and only tweaking done by the FIA will keep that in check.

Get over the cylinder count already! My Ducati 916 only has 2!

And as for the noise made by a 'four-potter', has anyone heard Yamaha's straight four MotoGP engine?!

Which also begs the question: Cross plane crank or normal?

[ptclaus98]

Originally Posted by Spritle

Lawn movers with movable rear wings, probably at 4-5 seconds a lap slower overall when you factor in the Pirellis. Is this what we really want from the "pinnacle?" GP2 and lower series, EVEN NASCAR will be dusting F1 lap times. I can hear the snickering now...

Will the teams be flying in single engine prop planes or walking to save fuel as well? This is really silly and will cost a fortune to implement, what happened to cost cutting? Just abolish motor racing if the stupid environment is so important to the greenies. I COULD CARE LESS!! I want super fast cars burning massive amounts of carbon fuels, making a deafening roar and dumping massive amounts of carbon into the air. Bring it on, it's only 18-20 bloody races with a handful of cars. Get over it already! The carbon footprint of the protests in London was probably bigger than an F1 race!

All I know is the day that F1 becomes the slowest road series is the day I'm done. Four cylinders, my bloody Hyundai has 4 cylinders, what a disgrace!

Yeah, and my Ford Thunderbird has a V8, I bet that could destroy an F1 at Silverstone, too. It's even got twice the capacity! Shame on F1 for not having inline 23 cylinder engines with 15 turbos and 2 superchargers.


And more death. That's the trick!

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by ptclaus98

And more death. That's the trick!

Oh, good grief...

[Wims]

Originally Posted by Spritle

...

All I know is the day that F1 becomes the slowest road series is the day I'm done. Four cylinders, my bloody Hyundai has 4 cylinders, what a disgrace!

I remember a 4 cylinder Toyota in GTP that delivered more than 1000BHP. There has been some seriously mean 4 cylinders through out the history.

Also, I think less driveability for the engine is a good thing. Maybe drivers will start to make mistakes again and overtaking will once again be possible

[Alex Hodgkinson]

Originally Posted by Wims

I remember a 4 cylinder Toyota in GTP that delivered more than 1000BHP. There has been some seriously mean 4 cylinders through out the history.

That was a 2.1, could last 12 hour races and was nearly 20 years ago! 750 bhp from a 1.6 turbo is rather underwhelming.

[cerdic]

Maybe I'm just older than everyone else but - the 1.5 turbos in the 80s put out well over 1000bhp and most of those were 4 pots.

The BMW - based on a ROAD car engine - reputedly went off the scale on a 1400bhp dyno. And this with 80s technology!

Enough power for you?

(course, the FIA today would never allow power outputs on that level anyway....)

[Marbot]

750bhp is what we have now, so it's unlikely that the FIA were going to allow regulations for power-plants to produce more power than that and use more fuel.

Originally the engines were going to be 1 litre turbo's. Now that would really have been something!

An interesting article about the 70's and 80's turbo era.

http://autospeed.com/cms/title_The-E...9/article.html

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Wims

Also, I think less driveability for the engine is a good thing.

I don't think that will be an issue with modern turbo technology. Peak torque will be vastly superior to the 2.4 V8 in any case (see the difference in torque between even a tuned road car 1.6 turbo engine and that of say a tuned 2.5 NA road car engine). Modern turbo technology will mean that you'll also be able to have that amount of torque over more of the rpm range.

[Bononi]

Marbot, that's great. Can you provide us with more detailed info ?

[wnut]

I really don't care what the regulations are, as long as they provide really fast cars and close and spectacular racing.

I don't have much hope that the present F1 club formula is going to deliver the needed regulations anytime soon.

[Joe Taylor]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Originally the engines were going to be 1 litre turbo's. Now that would really have been something!

Only if they were allowed to rev to a million rpm.

[Neil22]

Originally Posted by Joe Taylor

Only if they were allowed to rev to a million rpm.

They would sound like ****ed off sewing machines.

[Pingguest]

I have my doubts on the 2013 engine regulations. The new engine regulations still provide an absolute single point of perfection, resulting in convergence of design and performances. The only way to gain an advantage is to use more resources.

A resource restriction is not the right answer to this problem. It will only delay teams to get close to the single solution and ending up with the same design. The solution is to get rid of a legal framework in which there's only one absolute solution. A mandated engine configuration is just the opposite of it.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Joe Taylor

Only if they were allowed to rev to a million rpm.

See that's where you're wrong. NA engines need revs, turbo engines need boost. 1.5 litre turbo's got 1500bhp from just 13,000rpm. So how much would a 'modern' 1 litre turbo(ed) F1 engine produce with the same boost at the same rpm? Do the math.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

I have my doubts on the 2013 engine regulations. The new engine regulations still provide an absolute single point of perfection, resulting in convergence of design and performances. The only way to gain an advantage is to use more resources.

A resource restriction is not the right answer to this problem. It will only delay teams to get close to the single solution and ending up with the same design. The solution is to get rid of a legal framework in which there's only one absolute solution. A mandated engine configuration is just the opposite of it.

So you suggest that engine manufacturers (very different to "teams") can use unlimited resources to arrive at what everyone else will arrive at faster than if there wasn't a resource restriction?

These days they will arrive at a configuration 'solution' very quickly anyway, since it's possible for engine manufacturers to design, build and run different types of engines without ever having to move away from their lap top screens.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Bononi

Marbot, that's great. Can you provide us with more detailed info ?

Just as soon as it finally turns up on the FIA website.

[E.B]

Originally Posted by Marbot

..... 1.5 litre turbo's got 1500bhp from just 13,000rpm. So how much would a 'modern' 1 litre turbo(ed) F1 engine produce with the same boost at the same rpm? Do the math.

The saddest part about the c1500 bhp figures on the BMW engine, is that not only was that power only available for the final qualy laps. The engines were built to do a handful of laps only and then be swapped for a c800bhp race engine.

Of course a very large part of the power we heard of was the magic potions and fuel recipes that were needed to cope with the high boost being used . And the smell of those fuels.

And then it got to be seen as a bit irresponsible and of course with fuel limits being cut down drastically, we saw Turbo cars often trickle to a halt in the last laps out of fuel. That and the reduced boost limit in the last of the turbo years made them no more powerful than the NA cars and Turbo's were banned.