95 - 02 F1 Tech
Discussion
uktrailmonster said:
No mate, I was there at BAR and personally involved in the discussions with the Honda engineers. The engine was throttled back massively for actual track usage. It could produce more power, but they wouldn't let us use it. It became quite a sore point as you can imagine. The race power output was well under 700 hp in 2001, when the BMW was already pushing 900 or more at the time. It was a joke to be honest.
I'm not saying you weren't told that, but I don't believe the stats, sorry. Looking at 2001 BAR had several competitive races.Taking a rough stat of 75hp equalling 2 seconds at Monza (roughly). Assume the top engines were at 830-850ish hp (not 900 in 2001)
150 hp difference in race trim would be ~4-5 seconds difference at Monza. They were only 1.9sec off pole time. I believe they were trailing in power, but not the amount you were told - the stats don't support it. 50-75hp maybe. Similar across other races
Also, it was well reported that the BMW didn't break 900hp until the P83 in 2003, they were all sub <900 in race spec before then - at least that is what I recall and the contemporary reports indicated.
Vaud said:
I'm not saying you weren't told that, but I don't believe the stats, sorry. Looking at 2001 BAR had several competitive races.
Taking a rough stat of 75hp equalling 2 seconds at Monza (roughly). Assume the top engines were at 830-850ish hp (not 900 in 2001)
150 hp difference in race trim would be ~4-5 seconds difference at Monza. They were only 1.9sec off pole time. I believe they were trailing in power, but not the amount you were told - the stats don't support it. 50-75hp maybe. Similar across other races
Also, it was well reported that the BMW didn't break 900hp until the P83 in 2003, they were all sub <900 in race spec before then - at least that is what I recall and the contemporary reports indicated.
You may well be right about the BMW power (all I know from personal experience is that the BMW did make around 1000 hp in 2005/6 when I moved there), but I know I'm right about the Honda power. Or are you suggesting that Honda lied to the whole engineering dept at BAR, including the Technical Director? I seriously doubt it when we were begging them to allow us to use higher rpm limits in qual and race. I've worked with Honda engineers on and off for many years and they are extremely conservative and stick very rigidly to their development targets. Unfortunately they set their targets for this F1 engine way too low and then refused to compensate by pushing the envelope higher. They basically lived in denial that they no longer had a competitive F1 engine. Their management was also paranoid about engine failures damaging their reputation, which held back development still further. I should add that the Honda engineers on the ground were a great bunch to work with despite these shortcomings.Taking a rough stat of 75hp equalling 2 seconds at Monza (roughly). Assume the top engines were at 830-850ish hp (not 900 in 2001)
150 hp difference in race trim would be ~4-5 seconds difference at Monza. They were only 1.9sec off pole time. I believe they were trailing in power, but not the amount you were told - the stats don't support it. 50-75hp maybe. Similar across other races
Also, it was well reported that the BMW didn't break 900hp until the P83 in 2003, they were all sub <900 in race spec before then - at least that is what I recall and the contemporary reports indicated.
On reflection the 2001 BAR was probably a very good chassis as suggested by the OP on this thread and hence my comment on its lack of power.
Your stat of 75hp = 2 secs also seems dubious, although to be honest I can't remember the numbers on this. It just seems too high even for Monza.
uktrailmonster said:
You may well be right about the BMW power (all I know from personal experience is that the BMW did make around 1000 hp in 2005/6 when I moved there), but I know I'm right about the Honda power. Or are you suggesting that Honda lied to the whole engineering dept at BAR, including the Technical Director? I seriously doubt it when we were begging them to allow us to use higher rpm limits in qual and race. I've worked with Honda engineers on and off for many years and they are extremely conservative and stick very rigidly to their development targets. Unfortunately they set their targets for this F1 engine way too low and then refused to compensate by pushing the envelope higher. They basically lived in denial that they no longer had a competitive F1 engine. Their management was also paranoid about engine failures damaging their reputation, which held back development still further. I should add that the Honda engineers on the ground were a great bunch to work with despite these shortcomings.
On reflection the 2001 BAR was probably a very good chassis as suggested by the OP on this thread and hence my comment on its lack of power.
Your stat of 75hp = 2 secs also seems dubious, although to be honest I can't remember the numbers on this. It just seems too high even for Monza.
Fair points, I agreed it was down on power, just not 200hp. And denial/refusal to accept the obvious in Japanese business culture - never On reflection the 2001 BAR was probably a very good chassis as suggested by the OP on this thread and hence my comment on its lack of power.
Your stat of 75hp = 2 secs also seems dubious, although to be honest I can't remember the numbers on this. It just seems too high even for Monza.
Vaud said:
Fair points, I agreed it was down on power, just not 200hp. And denial/refusal to accept the obvious in Japanese business culture - never
For arguments sake lets say at least 100 hp down on the best and almost certainly the least powerful engine of that era. The power figures as specified to BAR always began with a 6 and we had no reason to doubt them. We had regular face to face meetings with Honda to discuss the engine development programme and they were pretty tense, although everyone remained polite on both sides. Megaflow said:
I'm not sure they were even behind. I have a video in my youtube favourites on Honda F1 engines on the dyno, and this is a screen shot of the dyno screen:
The left hand 'gauge' clearly shows ~15,000rpm, most likely 15,136rpm according to the green data in the top left of the screen.
The right hand 'gauge' shows ~990 something, but the something has clearly been blurred out, it doesn't take a genius to work out what that gauge might be.
Now, whether they ever raced such power is a different thing entirely.
Assuming those numbers are correct, that is 343lb/ft, which would seem to point to it being a 3.5 litre engine for a specific torque of 98lb/ft/ltr and a BMEP of 16.7bar.
All of which are entirely achievable.
No way can the 3.0 V10's make nearly 1000bhp at only 15krpm.The left hand 'gauge' clearly shows ~15,000rpm, most likely 15,136rpm according to the green data in the top left of the screen.
The right hand 'gauge' shows ~990 something, but the something has clearly been blurred out, it doesn't take a genius to work out what that gauge might be.
Now, whether they ever raced such power is a different thing entirely.
Assuming those numbers are correct, that is 343lb/ft, which would seem to point to it being a 3.5 litre engine for a specific torque of 98lb/ft/ltr and a BMEP of 16.7bar.
All of which are entirely achievable.
Best i saw personally, was 948bhp @ 19,800.
uktrailmonster said:
We had regular face to face meetings with Honda to discuss the engine development programme and they were pretty tense, although everyone remained polite on both sides.
I am interested in the relationship between team and engine provider. I always had it in my mind (having seen some teams up close) that it would be more the team taking the risk of pushing the engine too far and that the engine provider would provide an operating range but wouldn't necessarily have ultimate veto if the team wanted to go outside of that range. Vaud said:
I am interested in the relationship between team and engine provider. I always had it in my mind (having seen some teams up close) that it would be more the team taking the risk of pushing the engine too far and that the engine provider would provide an operating range but wouldn't necessarily have ultimate veto if the team wanted to go outside of that range.
Obviously depends on the engine supply contract, but in all the teams/engine deals I've been involved with (5 or so) it has always been the engine supplier calling the shots on engine rpm and temp ranges, mileage etc. Makes sense as they are the experts after all.stevesingo said:
Max, what sort of EGTs did you see?
Define what you mean by EGT! (the issue is that you are not measuring the true gas temperature, but actually the temperature of the exhause thermocouple probe in a highly turbulent yet transient flow. Typically, we correlated thermocouple readings vs rpm/load with measured exhaust valve and exh manifold peak material temp (which is what you actually care about)
Ok, I've worked out you can't be either Jock Clear, Kieran Pilbeam, Andy Shovlin or James Robinson??
but as you are an F1 olde timer I think I know who you are and will have worked with you!
PS good choice of car you own
but as you are an F1 olde timer I think I know who you are and will have worked with you!
PS good choice of car you own
uktrailmonster said:
You may well be right about the BMW power (all I know from personal experience is that the BMW did make around 1000 hp in 2005/6 when I moved there), but I know I'm right about the Honda power. Or are you suggesting that Honda lied to the whole engineering dept at BAR, including the Technical Director? I seriously doubt it when we were begging them to allow us to use higher rpm limits in qual and race. I've worked with Honda engineers on and off for many years and they are extremely conservative and stick very rigidly to their development targets. Unfortunately they set their targets for this F1 engine way too low and then refused to compensate by pushing the envelope higher. They basically lived in denial that they no longer had a competitive F1 engine. Their management was also paranoid about engine failures damaging their reputation, which held back development still further. I should add that the Honda engineers on the ground were a great bunch to work with despite these shortcomings.
On reflection the 2001 BAR was probably a very good chassis as suggested by the OP on this thread and hence my comment on its lack of power.
Your stat of 75hp = 2 secs also seems dubious, although to be honest I can't remember the numbers on this. It just seems too high even for Monza.
On reflection the 2001 BAR was probably a very good chassis as suggested by the OP on this thread and hence my comment on its lack of power.
Your stat of 75hp = 2 secs also seems dubious, although to be honest I can't remember the numbers on this. It just seems too high even for Monza.
Max_Torque said:
Define what you mean by EGT!
(the issue is that you are not measuring the true gas temperature, but actually the temperature of the exhause thermocouple probe in a highly turbulent yet transient flow. Typically, we correlated thermocouple readings vs rpm/load with measured exhaust valve and exh manifold peak material temp (which is what you actually care about)
What I probably meant was temps in a similar position to the thermocouple position in the video, i.e post collector.(the issue is that you are not measuring the true gas temperature, but actually the temperature of the exhause thermocouple probe in a highly turbulent yet transient flow. Typically, we correlated thermocouple readings vs rpm/load with measured exhaust valve and exh manifold peak material temp (which is what you actually care about)
How do you go about measuring exhaust valve temps I wonder?
uktrailmonster said:
Vaud said:
I'm not saying you weren't told that, but I don't believe the stats, sorry. Looking at 2001 BAR had several competitive races.
Taking a rough stat of 75hp equalling 2 seconds at Monza (roughly). Assume the top engines were at 830-850ish hp (not 900 in 2001)
150 hp difference in race trim would be ~4-5 seconds difference at Monza. They were only 1.9sec off pole time. I believe they were trailing in power, but not the amount you were told - the stats don't support it. 50-75hp maybe. Similar across other races
Also, it was well reported that the BMW didn't break 900hp until the P83 in 2003, they were all sub <900 in race spec before then - at least that is what I recall and the contemporary reports indicated.
You may well be right about the BMW power (all I know from personal experience is that the BMW did make around 1000 hp in 2005/6 when I moved there), but I know I'm right about the Honda power. Or are you suggesting that Honda lied to the whole engineering dept at BAR, including the Technical Director? I seriously doubt it when we were begging them to allow us to use higher rpm limits in qual and race. I've worked with Honda engineers on and off for many years and they are extremely conservative and stick very rigidly to their development targets. Unfortunately they set their targets for this F1 engine way too low and then refused to compensate by pushing the envelope higher. They basically lived in denial that they no longer had a competitive F1 engine. Their management was also paranoid about engine failures damaging their reputation, which held back development still further. I should add that the Honda engineers on the ground were a great bunch to work with despite these shortcomings.Taking a rough stat of 75hp equalling 2 seconds at Monza (roughly). Assume the top engines were at 830-850ish hp (not 900 in 2001)
150 hp difference in race trim would be ~4-5 seconds difference at Monza. They were only 1.9sec off pole time. I believe they were trailing in power, but not the amount you were told - the stats don't support it. 50-75hp maybe. Similar across other races
Also, it was well reported that the BMW didn't break 900hp until the P83 in 2003, they were all sub <900 in race spec before then - at least that is what I recall and the contemporary reports indicated.
On reflection the 2001 BAR was probably a very good chassis as suggested by the OP on this thread and hence my comment on its lack of power.
Your stat of 75hp = 2 secs also seems dubious, although to be honest I can't remember the numbers on this. It just seems too high even for Monza.
slipstream 1985 said:
interesting. With honda comming back will they adopt the approach to the engine power and compromise it for reliabilty?
They shouldn't need to be chasing the power. It is limited by the fuel flow. Where development will happen is in efficiency from all components that move. expect to hear about weird and wonderful coatings and possibly bearing technology making a leap forward in friction efficiency.Ok, Question from a thickie....
I was at GPlive at donnington about 6 or 7 years ago. The Euroboss cars were fantastic to watch! event orginasition was woefull!
During the event, A laptop that plugs into one of the cars was "removed" from a pit garage.
How big a deal is that? can a car even be started without it? would the software be replaceable?
Also, for the teams that still exist, are they friendly towards people trying to run their old cars?
Peter
I was at GPlive at donnington about 6 or 7 years ago. The Euroboss cars were fantastic to watch! event orginasition was woefull!
During the event, A laptop that plugs into one of the cars was "removed" from a pit garage.
How big a deal is that? can a car even be started without it? would the software be replaceable?
Also, for the teams that still exist, are they friendly towards people trying to run their old cars?
Peter
pedromorgan said:
Ok, Question from a thickie....
I was at GPlive at donnington about 6 or 7 years ago. The Euroboss cars were fantastic to watch! event orginasition was woefull!
During the event, A laptop that plugs into one of the cars was "removed" from a pit garage.
How big a deal is that? can a car even be started without it? would the software be replaceable?
Also, for the teams that still exist, are they friendly towards people trying to run their old cars?
Peter
Yes you can start a car without the laptop plugged in as long as the fuel map and engine temps are somewhere in the range of what the car needs to fire up in the first place, otherwise if a car stalled during a pitstop it would be a painful exercise to get it going again.I was at GPlive at donnington about 6 or 7 years ago. The Euroboss cars were fantastic to watch! event orginasition was woefull!
During the event, A laptop that plugs into one of the cars was "removed" from a pit garage.
How big a deal is that? can a car even be started without it? would the software be replaceable?
Also, for the teams that still exist, are they friendly towards people trying to run their old cars?
Peter
However when it comes to monitoring and setting changes you need the software, and for older cars the ECU can be quite specific on the software versions, hence as mentioned earlier you need a fine vintage of DOS or early Windows laptops at your disposal. Nothing is irreplaceable but you definitely could not pop down to PC World and buy a new laptop, insert your install CD and get an old car running again.
I don't know if they still do it but one team used to mothball a laptop from each year of car to ensure they had something which was known to work with that generation of ECU.
I doubt it. I'm betting these old systems use a serial port to communicate and that's something modern hardware doesn't come with.
You get problems using USB to serial converters especially with old software combined with the dongles they'll be using.
If you're stuck using old hardware and you might as well use the original OS's which aren't hard to find anyway. Old hardware is more difficult unless you know where to look because it's mostly been skipped already.
You get problems using USB to serial converters especially with old software combined with the dongles they'll be using.
If you're stuck using old hardware and you might as well use the original OS's which aren't hard to find anyway. Old hardware is more difficult unless you know where to look because it's mostly been skipped already.
As above it's certainly not impossible to start a car without a laptop. Given enough knowledge of where stuffs supposed to be and an IR pyro it's not difficult at all. The issue is making changes to the car without one, you really do need to tweek them for each use so without one you'd be stuck. Anyone trying to run one of these with only one laptop on the go is asking for trouble though. We generally have four per car a "master" which an image is taken from and then stored safely for future use/abuse and three "on the go". Generally we use IBM/Lenovo and Panasonic as these are readily available with serial ports, parallel ports and PCMCIA slots.
Vintage IT is definitely where it's at with these cars though, you've no chance of running any of the kit we need on a modern £350 from Tesco job.
It's not just laptops either, I had need to fire one the "rigs" up the other day so I could set some gearbox stuff up as all the hardware dongles are wired into the back of it and I didn't fancy taking it apart to try and make it go on a suitable vintage laptop
With the season fast approaching as well we've had cause to start sorting out what spares need freshing up or sourcing. First up was picking the best two sets of dampers we have left from this lot and refurbing them. Luckily we have shed loads of damper spares so accident damage aside we have enough to keep us going pretty much forever.
Same with clutches really, pick the best, refurb and fit. The "old" one then gets refurbed and put back into spares and into the use rotation. Anything worn beyond use goes in the bin. Again we have sufficent stock of cluthces, spares, shims etc. to keep us going pretty much indefinitely.
And again with Moog valves (which control the various hydraulic actuators on the car). At £1700 to refurb one and £3500 for a new one you don't really want to be buying them too often! We try to bias use across the spares to keep them all at around the same level. We have some at 10,000+KM and still going strong! Although at that age we try not to use them and they have a test before and after use.
The uprights are always a work of art and with the last crack test work going on last week I thought I'd grab a couple of photos and write a bit up on them. These are 2000 era hollow cast titanium items. The wall thicknesses are surprisingly thin and the webbings which support the bearing carrier are always a cause for concern. We use a dye penetration crack test system with them as it highlights failures in the casting extremely well, it's not so good for fabricated units as they surfaces are generally rough and the weld lines can hide cracks in the surface.
This one is at the end of the process, any cracks would show up as defined red lines in the white coating. Here it is pre test:
And a closer look:
The webbing not only reduces the weight of the upright massively but also provides a path through the centre of the upright for brake cooling air flow. The disc bell sits over the webbings and air flows into the bell and out through the radial holes in the disc.
Finally a few sensors need checking and refurbing prior to use, including the laser ride heights we run on a couple of the cars:
Here we have front, rear and spare. They're very clever and measure a 200mm range between 100mm and 300mm. They work by directing a laser onto the ground below the car and measuring its reflection. Response time is around 10ms so coupled with pots on the dampers and load cells on the pushrods we have a pretty good idea of what the body of the car is doing and what each corner is doing at the same time.
Busy times for us at the moment so apologies for not updating sooner!
Vintage IT is definitely where it's at with these cars though, you've no chance of running any of the kit we need on a modern £350 from Tesco job.
It's not just laptops either, I had need to fire one the "rigs" up the other day so I could set some gearbox stuff up as all the hardware dongles are wired into the back of it and I didn't fancy taking it apart to try and make it go on a suitable vintage laptop
With the season fast approaching as well we've had cause to start sorting out what spares need freshing up or sourcing. First up was picking the best two sets of dampers we have left from this lot and refurbing them. Luckily we have shed loads of damper spares so accident damage aside we have enough to keep us going pretty much forever.
Same with clutches really, pick the best, refurb and fit. The "old" one then gets refurbed and put back into spares and into the use rotation. Anything worn beyond use goes in the bin. Again we have sufficent stock of cluthces, spares, shims etc. to keep us going pretty much indefinitely.
And again with Moog valves (which control the various hydraulic actuators on the car). At £1700 to refurb one and £3500 for a new one you don't really want to be buying them too often! We try to bias use across the spares to keep them all at around the same level. We have some at 10,000+KM and still going strong! Although at that age we try not to use them and they have a test before and after use.
The uprights are always a work of art and with the last crack test work going on last week I thought I'd grab a couple of photos and write a bit up on them. These are 2000 era hollow cast titanium items. The wall thicknesses are surprisingly thin and the webbings which support the bearing carrier are always a cause for concern. We use a dye penetration crack test system with them as it highlights failures in the casting extremely well, it's not so good for fabricated units as they surfaces are generally rough and the weld lines can hide cracks in the surface.
This one is at the end of the process, any cracks would show up as defined red lines in the white coating. Here it is pre test:
And a closer look:
The webbing not only reduces the weight of the upright massively but also provides a path through the centre of the upright for brake cooling air flow. The disc bell sits over the webbings and air flows into the bell and out through the radial holes in the disc.
Finally a few sensors need checking and refurbing prior to use, including the laser ride heights we run on a couple of the cars:
Here we have front, rear and spare. They're very clever and measure a 200mm range between 100mm and 300mm. They work by directing a laser onto the ground below the car and measuring its reflection. Response time is around 10ms so coupled with pots on the dampers and load cells on the pushrods we have a pretty good idea of what the body of the car is doing and what each corner is doing at the same time.
Busy times for us at the moment so apologies for not updating sooner!
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff