Ferrari talking sense about new engines

[dpbird90]

Translated from Spanish using google, please excuse speeling and grammer misstakes

Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo has an interest in delaying the introduction of new 4-cylinder turbo engine, which should arrive from 2013. When the FIA recently announced the measure, Montezemolo expressed displeasure, before adding that "would not stand in the way "of change.
But now it seems that Italy is looking for allies in an attempt to delay or reject the new rules. "We're not going to build four-cylinder engines for our cars our street," said the Italian leader . "A four-cylinder engine seems a bit weak for the pinnacle of motorsport Why could not agree on a Turbo V6? Not be confused with cheap affordable," Montezemolo insists.
Ferrari president is hopeful that other manufacturers, notably Mercedes, help to delay the changes. "If there is the slightest possibility of delaying the four-cylinder, I'll try to get it. I sense a possibility and we need to do unit ".


Turbo V6? Now you're talking!

[Streps]

3.0 V10s pretty please

[telecat]

If you are going to limit the engine then just limit the capacity!!! The manufacturers are going to have to shell out big time on this so let them decide on the configuration. For Ferrari a V6,V8 V10 makes sense as that's what they use to power their road cars.

[EDLT]

Its been said before, and it will probably be said many more times, but the only engine regulation they need is a limit on the amount of fuel for the weekend. Then, if the cars are going too fast just reduce the amount of fuel they can have.

[thestig84]

telecat said:

If you are going to limit the engine then just limit the capacity!!! The manufacturers are going to have to shell out big time on this so let them decide on the configuration. For Ferrari a V6,V8 V10 makes sense as that's what they use to power their road cars.

Thats all very well but F1 cant afford another spending war that that would bring.

As for the serial Mr Rant he is too late calling for support from other manufactures to delay the changes. If they were on his side they wouldnt have voted the new spec in with the other 12 teams. Too late Luca.

As for wanting v12,10 and 8. Sure they sound great but really have had their day. The way road cars are going (Renault, for example, is predicting that by 2015 more than 75% of the engines it produces will be small-capacity turbos) what would Renault or new manufactures like VW gain by showing off a v12 in F1!?

I am excited by the changes as Im sure are the engine designers. Its got to be better for them than a frozen V8. They are going to be running kers 150bhp from 25kg kit, which is pretty impressive ptw ratio along with pushing direct injection upto 100bar which manufactures have struggled with compared to their success with diesel.

Im looking forward to it!

[Scuffers]

thestig84 said:

telecat said:

If you are going to limit the engine then just limit the capacity!!! The manufacturers are going to have to shell out big time on this so let them decide on the configuration. For Ferrari a V6,V8 V10 makes sense as that's what they use to power their road cars.

Thats all very well but F1 cant afford another spending war that that would bring.

that's actually a wasted argument.

• all* the manufactures are going to have to develop new engines irrelevance if they are 4 pot or 8/10/12.

for Ferrari, they don't have a 4 pot road car, so you can see his point, they want to sell 612's etc with V12 engines and yet their F1 car will have a poxy 4 pot?

unless FIA carry out their threat and have a std engine, this is never going to save money.

Way I see it, it will be as dull as dishwater, a 600Bhp Turbo 4 pot is hardly cutting edge is it?

[anonymous-user]

I see 3 easy options for the future of F1:

1) Saving money = just leave all the rules as they are (minimum dev spend!!)
2) Saving the planet = cancel F1 racing (there's exactly no point "trying" to be green when what you are doing is driving pointless round in circles for 2 hrs)
3) Making it exciting, close, interesting, and popular = back to 900+ bhp V10's, with less grip / aero !!

simples ;-)


(and it lets the manufacturers spend the money doing the real environmental work by making there road cars better (after all, knocking say 5mpg off a Mini (of which 1000's are sold) is going to save a whole lot more fuel worldwide than knocking 5mpg off a single F1 car.......)

[davepoth]

Stupid point really, it's not as if there's nobody in the entire Fiat group that makes turbocharged 4-pots is there?

More sour grapes from Ferrari. It doesn't benefit them so they are moaning.

[zac510]

Well a 700hp V8 isn't cutting edge either when you describe it as only that. They're common as muck these days, just start with a Chev. The cutting edge is in the detail like ports, chambers, valves, injection patterns, metal coatings so hopefully the regulations continue to allow these tech. The number of cylinders is ultimately irrelevant to anything but the soundtrack and the bleating from the marketing department as long as it still goes fast.

Anyway the FIA seem to have gone a little bit quiet on the world engine crap they were going on about about 12 months ago but maybe this 4 pot F1 engine is that again in disguise.

[Scuffers]

zac510 said:

Well a 700hp V8 isn't cutting edge either when you describe it as only that. They're common as muck these days, just start with a Chev.

yes, right, so a 2.4V8 making way north of 700Bhp at 18,000Rpm is an everyday car engine NOT!

I don't like the current V8 regs either, F1 is supposed to be about pushing boundaries, not 'std' this and that, else you might just as well scrap it and use GP2/F3000/etc.

[zac510]

Scuffers said:

zac510 said:

Well a 700hp V8 isn't cutting edge either when you describe it as only that. They're common as muck these days, just start with a Chev.

yes, right, so a 2.4V8 making way north of 700Bhp at 18,000Rpm is an everyday car engine NOT!

Now you clarify it as revving to 18000rpm it suddenly sounds a bit more interesting and cutting edge! What if the 4 pot were to rev to the same, wouldn't that still be cutting edge?

I guess we all know that this technical freedom for the 4pot is just a pipe dream. Every major change in engine capacity/design comes with a hoarde of extra restrictive regulations in other areas as part of the deal (see V10 -> V8 deal).

[Martin Keene]

zac510 said:

Scuffers said:

zac510 said:

Well a 700hp V8 isn't cutting edge either when you describe it as only that. They're common as muck these days, just start with a Chev.

yes, right, so a 2.4V8 making way north of 700Bhp at 18,000Rpm is an everyday car engine NOT!

Now you clarify it as revving to 18000rpm it suddenly sounds a bit more interesting and cutting edge! What if the 4 pot were to rev to the same, wouldn't that still be cutting edge?

I guess we all know that this technical freedom for the 4pot is just a pipe dream. Every major change in engine capacity/design comes with a hoarde of extra restrictive regulations in other areas as part of the deal (see V10 -> V8 deal).

McLaren openly admit to the current Mercedes V8 producing 750bhp. So if they are admitting to that, you can wager it is closer to 800... 333bhp / litre, yet capable of lasting for ~2500km.

[zac510]

Martin Keene said:

zac510 said:

Scuffers said:

zac510 said:

Well a 700hp V8 isn't cutting edge either when you describe it as only that. They're common as muck these days, just start with a Chev.

yes, right, so a 2.4V8 making way north of 700Bhp at 18,000Rpm is an everyday car engine NOT!

Now you clarify it as revving to 18000rpm it suddenly sounds a bit more interesting and cutting edge! What if the 4 pot were to rev to the same, wouldn't that still be cutting edge?

I guess we all know that this technical freedom for the 4pot is just a pipe dream. Every major change in engine capacity/design comes with a hoarde of extra restrictive regulations in other areas as part of the deal (see V10 -> V8 deal).

McLaren openly admit to the current Mercedes V8 producing 750bhp. So if they are admitting to that, you can wager it is closer to 800... 333bhp / litre, yet capable of lasting for ~2500km.

What's your point?

[Scuffers]

zac510 said:

Scuffers said:

zac510 said:

Well a 700hp V8 isn't cutting edge either when you describe it as only that. They're common as muck these days, just start with a Chev.

yes, right, so a 2.4V8 making way north of 700Bhp at 18,000Rpm is an everyday car engine NOT!

Now you clarify it as revving to 18000rpm it suddenly sounds a bit more interesting and cutting edge! What if the 4 pot were to rev to the same, wouldn't that still be cutting edge?

regs for the 4 pot state 12,000 limit.

[davepoth]

And Honda can build a 4 cylinder engine to redline at 9000 to put in a warrantied road vehicle. So there's going to be a lot more feedback into road car engines from these new motors. Except if you're Ferrari.

[NISaxoVTR]

Anyone who believes F1 tech feeds back into road cars in anyway has been watching way to many tyre adverts. F1 and road cars are worlds apart and ruining the F1 spectacle so marketing men can have more ammo for their road car brochures seems to be the way bernie is driving it.

How can heavily restricted 4 cylinder engines be the pinacle of motorsport? I wouldn't be suprised to see another F1 team revolt/threat of a break away series in the near future.

[otolith]

Bad enough that road cars have to be saddled with nasty little peasant engines, do we really have to extend it to F1 as a token gesture of greenery? The actual emissions of the cars are fk all in the grand scheme of the Formula 1 circus.

[davepoth]

NISaxoVTR said:

Anyone who believes F1 tech feeds back into road cars in anyway has been watching way to many tyre adverts. F1 and road cars are worlds apart and ruining the F1 spectacle so marketing men can have more ammo for their road car brochures seems to be the way bernie is driving it.

How can heavily restricted 4 cylinder engines be the pinacle of motorsport? I wouldn't be suprised to see another F1 team revolt/threat of a break away series in the near future.

Realistically speaking no. But there is actually some likelyhood of production blocks being used for the new F1 engines, which is sort of cool. I used to point that fact out to anyone who thought my E30 316 was rubbish, as it really did actually have a Formula 1 engine under the bonnet.

[anonymous-user]

davepoth said:

But there is actually some likelyhood of production blocks being used for the new F1 engines

Very unlikely, as a modern production block is a far cry from the 1980's versions that were used for F1. Modern blocks are so well optimised for strength/ weight with the intended BMEP output (usually a clylinder pressure limit at approx 100/110bar) that just slamming on a big turbo and "showing it the boost" isnt going to work ;-)

[MG CHRIS]

Dont forget during the 80s f1 cars had similar engines some where pushing 1200bhp in quali trim and arond 800 bhp in race trim althought i dont agree with the new regs the racing was still good back then so the racing should remain the same. However bernie and the fia are playing too much with the rules and are changing it to often so spending in f1 is not going to be reduced. What they need to do is bring back ground effects and reduces aero to make the cars harder to drive as at the moment they look like they are on rails going around the track, so less aero and keep the same engine with kerrs or similar that is what i would like to see.