Tuesday 28th June 2011

FIA Plans 1.6-litre V6s For F1

Six cylinder plans for appease teams uncomfortable with four-pot proposals

---

A plan to spec all F1 cars with 1.6-litre turbocharged V6s has been put forward by the FIA, and approved by team owners.

The new rules, which would come into effect from 2014, would effectively kill the FIA's previous proposal that F1 should run to a formula of 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbocharged engines from 2013.

There are a few caveats, however. It is understood that the teams will agree with the FIA's proposal to ditch the current 2.4-litre V8 formula, providing the planned changes to the chassis regulations are also delayed until 2014 to coincide with the engine changes, and that the rev limit for the new V6s is 15,000rpm rather than 12,000rpm (the current limit is 18,000rpm).

The FIA hopes to get the new regulations pushed through as soon as possible - ideally by the end of the month.

[Denorth]

it took a while to appear here.

there is already an opposition to this idea:
17 out of 19 race organisers expressed intention to drop F1 if there is 12,000rpm limit introduced. Ron Walker is theri representative. And it seems that it is already to be encreased to 15,000rpm

[soad]

There's just too many changes

[rampageturke]

Can we get a mixture of both engines? Like we used to do, appeals to both parties.

Also Renault said they would quit F1 if the Turbo 4 bangers were delayed, what do they think of this?

Also now we have to wait 3 years with these things they call 2.4 v8's

[stuttgartmetal]

A return to the turbo honda 1500cc v6 era.

[toppstuff]

Efficiency, costs, save the planet, eco-mentalism, its too expensive, blah..blah...blah...

I don't give a monkeys.

Bernie E has spouted a lot of blithering nonsense lately, but the one thing he does know is that , with F1, it is all about the show.

Bring back V12's I say.

[stuttgartmetal]

Bring back ayrtons 1000hp v6 honda turbo I say

[LordGrover]

Click & click.

[Scuffers]

stuttgartmetal said:

A return to the turbo honda 1500cc v6 era.

I do wish people would stop saying this....

the engines that are being proposed will be nothing like what we had before, with the fuel flow limit's etc, we will be lucky to get 600Bhp, and consider Coulthard comments that the current 2.4V8's were gutless at ~750Bhp

[marktul]

I really don't understand why the rules around the engines have to be so tight, surely they could just give them a maximum cost, maximum bhp, maximum torque and minimum mpg figure to work to and just let them come up with layouts that suit their cars. That way the likes of Ferrari and Renault could work on engines that reflect their product range.

[PaulMoor]

marktul said:

I really don't understand why the rules around the engines have to be so tight, surely they could just give them a maximum cost, maximum bhp, maximum torque and minimum mpg figure to work to and just let them come up with layouts that suit their cars. That way the likes of Ferrari and Renault could work on engines that reflect their product range.

Agreed. I would like to see them just have a maximum amount of fuel set for a race, and a cost for the team and let them race, but last time restricting costs was mentiond Ferarri through there toys out of there pram.

[AntJD]

I think its silly to restrict F1 so much! These cars are supposed to be the panicle of motorsport engineering and they just keep holding them back. I would LOVE to see an F1 car built to be as FAST as it can be with no restrictions and then see how it compares with Vettels Red Bull.

[PhillipM]

AntJD said:

I think its silly to restrict F1 so much! These cars are supposed to be the panicle of motorsport engineering and they just keep holding them back. I would LOVE to see an F1 car built to be as FAST as it can be with no restrictions and then see how it compares with Vettels Red Bull.

Not very well when you take the driver home in a coffin every race.

[Eric Mc]

Discussed here a couple of months ago.

Not possible anymore. Unrestricted technology became impossible from about 1980/81 =- if not earlier.

[365daytonafan]

AntJD said:

I think its silly to restrict F1 so much! These cars are supposed to be the panicle of motorsport engineering and they just keep holding them back. I would LOVE to see an F1 car built to be as FAST as it can be with no restrictions and then see how it compares with Vettels Red Bull.

Seem to remember F1 racing magazine asked Williams to come up with a concept of a Formula libre F1 car a few years ago.

Would have had the the 3.0 V10 engine, six wheels (four driven at the back) full ground effects and they estimated it would 10 seconds a lap faster than the 2004 3.0 V10 F1 cars (the fastest year of all in terms of F1 lap times)

Downside it would pull 5g + when cornering and highly likely the drivers would black out unless they wore fighter pilot like G suits. which is probably not ideal for great racing.

[gumsie]

PhillipM said:

AntJD said:

I think its silly to restrict F1 so much! These cars are supposed to be the panicle of motorsport engineering and they just keep holding them back. I would LOVE to see an F1 car built to be as FAST as it can be with no restrictions and then see how it compares with Vettels Red Bull.

Not very well when you take the driver home in a coffin every race.

Oh pullleeeezzz. Don't ever let anybody fool you into thinking it's all about safety. If it is, they wouldn't have introduced narrow tyres, (less grip and drag), with cars that were actually on the whole faster.
The FIA and that idiot Ecclescake have been trying their hardest to turn it from a real sport into a spectator sport and while I understand they have to draw money in they've gone over the top a little.
What could draw spectators more than a looser ruling on design that allows people, (like Chapman used to), to innovate?
Six wheeler, the fan car maybe, ground effects, turbos - all great ideas.

Now we have the ridiculously artificial DRS to allow the top cars to more easily pass the slower cars and leave them without a hope in hell of passing them back as they'd never get within that 1 second of them by the time they reach the zone, (great way to prevent smaller teams scoring points). The A***holes can't even make up their mind how many and where to put them! Next thing you know there'll be a DRS zone in the pits.

[Cossa]

AntJD said:

I think its silly to restrict F1 so much! These cars are supposed to be the panicle of motorsport engineering and they just keep holding them back. I would LOVE to see an F1 car built to be as FAST as it can be with no restrictions and then see how it compares with Vettels Red Bull.

Total agreed (within reason). These car are meant to go as fast as they possibly can and in the most dramatic way i.e. sound. Without a screaming V8 or V12 whizzing round whats the point. I might as well go and watch the touring cars, much cheaper, if the powers that be in F1 get a bit girly! There has to be a element of some risk in F1 as that is what makes the drama of it all. Not as if the drivers don't get paid enough in recognition of the risk! With the updates to the tracks and technology of the cars alot of the risk is mitigated anyway!

If FIA get their way I might as well take my diesel Beemer down Halfords and slap some logos and a big rear spoiler on the back and give it a go. It'll probably be the fastest car there!

[Synchromesh]

Why don't they just give the teams x amount of fuel for a season, and let them design any engine they want, but when they run out that's it? That way they would be forced to innovate for a combination of power and fuel consumption, which is relevant to the real world.

[RobM83]

PaulMoor said:

Agreed. I would like to see them just have a maximum amount of fuel set for a race, and a cost for the team and let them race, but last time restricting costs was mentiond Ferarri through there toys out of there pram.

My sentiments exactly. Give them a maximum fuel load per-race and leave it as that - let the teams do what they want with the engines. The whole point of F1 is to be the pinnacle of motorsport and engineering and the whole point of F1 racing is to have the quickest car over the course of the race.

So in my mind, restricting the fuel will make teams come up with clever ways to get the absolute best engine performance while being as lenient on fuel as possible which, given the desire to reduce costs and make F1 'go green' can't be a bad thing.

Does it really matter if one team has a 1.6 4-pot and another a 2.4 V8 if they all produce similar power and use similar amounts of fuel?

[bobberz]

I was actually kind of looking forward to the 4-pots. Thought it would be interesting to see how they could muster F1 style power out of such a small package.

Don't see how V6s are any more interesting than I4s?

I think the majority of comments on here are spot on; let the teams innovate to meet the fuel limits, rather than forcing all the teams to run identical setups. F1, until recently, was about innovation, not regulation!

I've seen what happens when regulation forces teams to build identical cars. It's called NASCAR. Same thing happened in stock car racing over 40 years ago. There were real innovaters back then, nitrous, supercharging, and turbos were all tried, and the "wing cars" that MoPar built in '69-'70 were the first American attempts at aerodynamics.

Subsequently, any experimentation was branded as "cheating", teams were forced to run identical engine setups in jelly-mould fiberglass bodies, and we have the boring spectacle of today.
Sad to see it happen to F1 as well.

[Scuffers]

bobberz said:

I was actually kind of looking forward to the 4-pots. Thought it would be interesting to see how they could muster F1 style power out of such a small package.

depends if you call 600Hp 'F1 style power'

let's face it, 600hp is hardly a challenge for a turbo'ed engine is it?

F1 needs more power, less aero, bigger tyres, not the other way round.