|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
1 Aug 2005, 18:11 (Ref:1369462) | #1 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,024
|
Engine rules: Alternatives?
http://www.autosport-atlas.com/news.aspx?id=46148&s=5
According to Autosport Norbert Haug has suggested alternatives for F1 engines of the future. Perhaps the way forward isn't to reduce capacity, but to increase it and have other limits (e.g rev limits)? So how would you do it? Start from the premise that you must have limitations on engines and they have to be broadly what they are aiming at with the new V8 formula (say 700-800bhp). What limitations would you have? Do we need lots of torque, or do we want want small engine with high revs? What other ways are there to limit the engines other than capacity? Chose your engine size and configuration and how you would limit it. Please open another thread if you wish to discuss other aspects of Haug's words or the actual new engine rules. |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
1 Aug 2005, 18:41 (Ref:1369486) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,332
|
I'm not a subscriber, so have no idea what Haug had to say
But I don't like rpm restrictions, that seems very artificial to me. Why? I'm not sure! But really, rpm limits don't really have a translation to production cars. They spin as many rpm as they reliably can given the design constraints their engineers are under. The same thing goes for air intake restrictors. They really don't have a translation to the production world. Displacement just makes sense to me. It is a very simple to regulate displacement. Displacement could also be used to free up the rules more than they are now... want to turbocharge? OK with the FIA, but you only get 1.6 litres. Supercharge? Well, FIA says 1.75. NA? 2.5. Limiting induction methods, number of cylinders, engine block geometries, etc, could all be eliminated by using solely displacement (and maybe material composition) regulations. The FIA can even have its precious standard ECU to eliminate the possibility of TC, but please don't put rev limits on the engines... let the engineers and laws of physics take care of that, subject to the material composition rules. |
||
__________________
Juliette Bravo! Juliette Bravo!!!! |
1 Aug 2005, 18:45 (Ref:1369489) | #3 | ||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,573
|
Frankly Adam whilst I admire your enthusiasm, the fact is that F1 is based on a set of parameters. The fact that those parameters are selected by an unknowing or being charitable, a wildly speculative bunch of misbegotten nincompoops, has absolutley no bearing on the matter. So why ask us to propose something that plainly is so far left field of F1 we can't even comment? Slapped wrist for being off topic!!!
BTW. No good going for torque because the circuits are designed for max revs at max power. Its why an F1 engine won't tow a caravan. Last edited by Peter Mallett; 1 Aug 2005 at 18:47. Reason: msellign |
||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
1 Aug 2005, 19:07 (Ref:1369521) | #4 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 16,661
|
A big, lazy engine like a 4l V8 as used in GP2 will always offer unstressed power and can go for ages between rebuilds.
So, use the GP2 engine spec, but with a slightly higher RPM limit. |
|
|
1 Aug 2005, 19:33 (Ref:1369557) | #5 | ||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,573
|
Ah,
Formula 5000 then? (Poetic licence I should have said "4000"). |
||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
2 Aug 2005, 02:56 (Ref:1369792) | #6 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,540
|
Why not rpm limits? Shiny – there are no displacement limits in production cars either… Not that I am actually advocating rpm limits, I prefer as few limitations as possible for F1.
However, after listening to the video of the new Cosworth V8, I would prefer something that will produce max revs of ~14k – at 18-20k rpm the engine is nothing but a blaring shriek whereas below 14k it actually sounded like an engine. How? Large enough capacity, and material limitations so that there will be sufficient reciprocating mass to discourage higher revs. Maybe a limit on the number of gear ratios so a wider power band is needed? |
||
|
2 Aug 2005, 07:45 (Ref:1369876) | #7 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,196
|
3 litre Ford DFV?
Just kidding ... but how about something that must be started inside the car with NO outside assistance, computers, fans etc |
|
__________________
"You can get lucky and win one championship but not two ..." Jamie Whincup. I wonder which person with the initials RK he was referring to. |
2 Aug 2005, 10:02 (Ref:1369961) | #8 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 167
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"Ah," said Dirk "it is a rare mind indeed that can render the hitherto non-existent blindingly obvious." |
2 Aug 2005, 11:40 (Ref:1370052) | #9 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,332
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Juliette Bravo! Juliette Bravo!!!! |
2 Aug 2005, 13:58 (Ref:1370157) | #10 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,721
|
I'm becoming more and more keen on the old Group C idea - here's your fuel, do what you like with the engine. But that's all the fuel you're getting.
|
||
__________________
Interviewer: "Will the McLaren F1 be your answer to the Ferrari F40?" Gordon Murray: "Hmm... I don't think we have anyone at McLaren who can weld that badly..." |
2 Aug 2005, 14:10 (Ref:1370170) | #11 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
|
||
|
3 Aug 2005, 13:00 (Ref:1371069) | #12 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
I would only restrict the engine capacity to 1500cc for turbo-engines and 4000cc for normal aspirated. With a ban on refuelling, the power of the engines could be controled. This could also be accomplished by introducing a standard ECU, and so a ban on traction control.
|
||
|
4 Aug 2005, 07:13 (Ref:1371657) | #13 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
4 Aug 2005, 07:30 (Ref:1371667) | #14 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,382
|
I like that idea as well.
Give each car 200 litres of fuel for the race weekend, or 100 litres for the race, and then see what they do. Allow Naturally Aspirated engines of any size to compete. Id love to see a big 4 litre engine in one f1 car, and another team run a highly strung 2 litre engine. I dunno how turbos could fit in though. Quote:
|
||
__________________
... without motorsport, what is sport? |
4 Aug 2005, 07:30 (Ref:1371668) | #15 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5,917
|
Quote: "I'm becoming more and more keen on the old Group C idea - here's your fuel, do what you like with the engine. But that's all the fuel you're getting."
You're talking about Fuel-limit? I've been thinking about that too, and i thought it is far better than placing any rev restrictions etc. Allow anything up to V10 and 4 litres...no turbos...hence, with just a rough guideline and loosen the limitations to engines, let manufacturers make the engine they deem fit. But the consumption and amount of fuel is kept limited. it would directly benefit them when it comes to engineering road car engines |
||
__________________
Alonso: "McLaren and Williams are also great racing teams, but Ferrari is the biggest one that you can go to." |
4 Aug 2005, 18:14 (Ref:1372176) | #16 | |
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 198
|
Fuel limit would be a fantastic idea...esp how at the moment people are worrying more and more about their mpg etc. So maybe ban refuelling completely and say a fuel tank can only be x litres or allow refuelling but only allow x litres to be used during a race so that strategy can still come into it. So not only would this be good PR for the companies but would also allow the FIA to control engine power and so speed of the cars. Personally i think there are better ways to slow down the cars but if thats how they want to slow them down then fair enough!
Also why dont the FIA limit the number of engines the teams can use in a year during race weekends. Something similar to what the BTCC used to have however more engines. If there were 19 races then say each driver could use 22/23 engines for the championship. This would mean that teams wont be for ever running with rev limits etc and also drivers wouldn't be thrown to the back possibly spoiling the championship (Raikkonen) while still controlling the number of engines used |
|
|
4 Aug 2005, 19:00 (Ref:1372222) | #17 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
I don't really see the benefit of a fuel restriction. If refuelling during the race would be banned, other fuel restriction won't be necessary.
|
||
|
4 Aug 2005, 19:09 (Ref:1372232) | #18 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
Well, there is a difference. The teams can use different sizes of fuel tanks, hence more fuel and so on than other teams. They wouldn't necessarily have to limit their designs to a specific amount of fuel, they could take the wieght penalty if theythought it payed off in performance.
With a limit on the actual amount of fuel itself, it sets a specific parameter that all the teams have to work within. Although, in some ways, the two tings overlap and have a somewhat similar effect there is a distinct difference. |
||
|
5 Aug 2005, 10:11 (Ref:1372715) | #19 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
I have to say that i would be in favour of an engine that was maybe too powerful for the drivers to use at full throttle for the majority of a lap.So a larger,more powerful,3.5-4 litre engine (V12s ) would be about right,with perhaps 150 bhp available on a boost button as and when required.With an engine that has more than enough power,a driver (if he's brave enough) can use this to make up for other car defficiencies.Remember,the throttle works both ways.
|
|
|
5 Aug 2005, 12:50 (Ref:1372866) | #20 | |
Rookie
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 24
|
Why not do what they do in the Cart series in the US:
1. Use turbos with pop off valves so the engine power can be limited 2. Impose a restirction in that all the cars must be able to run at a specified minimum mpg figure That way you have specified (and very public) limiting factors but still allow manufacturers to play with the engines, max rev's, torque, etc.... |
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Engine rules loopholes? | Hazard | Formula One | 39 | 23 Apr 2005 08:59 |
Are the new engine rules too restrictive? | Adam43 | Formula One | 7 | 31 Oct 2004 16:54 |
Engine change rules | RiZLa | Touring Car Racing | 7 | 19 Jun 2003 15:50 |
BTCT Engine rules | Sodemo | Touring Car Racing | 3 | 30 Apr 2001 13:06 |
No-rules F1 - engine questions | Jared | Racing Technology | 8 | 30 Aug 2000 10:16 |