F1 - how closely matched are the engines?

[tertius]

I was chatting about this with a friend who was arguing that the engine regulations meant that F1 engines were to all intents and purposes identical. I was arguing the opposite and that simply because they were developed by different teams, with different approaches even if they all meet the regs exactly they couldn't actually be the same or perform the same.

The other thread about Christian Horner and the Renault engine being down on power makes me think I must be right, but ...

I've had a look at the regs and they seem fairly tight to my layman's eye, so what are the real differences between the engines and why? Or to put it another way what is "free" in the regs that will result in meaningful differences?

And consequently do we know which is the most powerful engine? The least powerful? Heaviest, thirstiest, etc.. I assume its not exactly public data but can it be derived somehow?

[Jungles]

Rumour in the field is that the Renault is the most efficient but least powerful. Merc and Ferrari are the most powerful but Merc is the best all-rounder and most reliable, while Ferrari is the thirstiest. Cosworth is a solid all-rounder and very cheap, but suffers from unusually high loss of power at high mileage (fix pending FIA permission) and drive-ability.

Edited by Jungles on Friday 2nd July 01:24

[jon-]

Jungles said:

Renault is the most efficient but least powerful

Hmm

Lowest power engine uses less fuel shocker!

[SamHH]

jon- said:

Jungles said:

Renault is the most efficient but least powerful

Hmm

Lowest power engine uses less fuel shocker!

I don't know about the performance of the F1 engines, but it's worth noting that "most efficient" isn't the same as "uses least fuel".