FIA Standard Engine
Discussion
rohrl said:
Scuffers said:
OK, take out the increasing level of emissions regs and you think they would be going this way?
CO2 marketing guff at governmental level, why should F1 pander to this?
Why should we take out the emissions regs? They exist whether we like them or not. F1 exists in the world we live in, not some fantasy world.CO2 marketing guff at governmental level, why should F1 pander to this?
Scuffers said:
they exist right now, who know what's coming next?
why should F1 care?
Are you being deliberately obstreperous? why should F1 care?
F1 is a marketing tool dressed up as a racing series to make it palatable. This means it has to at least try to resemble the real world a bit, since it doesn't lead the way on much any more.
The days of F1 being a test bed for new technologies fell by the way side with the advent of tighter and tighter restrictions on the technology being used. At least now, for the first time since the '90's, it can say it is at least mildly relevant.
You could stick two fingers up to the rest of the world and use pushrod V8's but F1 is supposed to be about pushing the boundaries of technology as well as being a racing series.
Wombat3 said:
I don't see how they could stop the others making an engine to the same specs as the new "standard" if they wanted to. They will also never mandate that Ferrari can not construct its own engines or make it so that they can not compete to win.
The Ecclestone statement suggested a contract being taken out for a single engine supplier as in some other formulae. This might be a simple ploy; say something which would have everyone against the idea and then coming up with one slightly different with everyone relieved.Whatever, there is nothing to stop the FIA giving the contract to one supplier. Take a look at Wiliams and the F2 one-design chassis.
But this is scare mongering I think. I hope.
IforB said:
Scuffers said:
they exist right now, who know what's coming next?
why should F1 care?
Are you being deliberately obstreperous? why should F1 care?
F1 is a marketing tool dressed up as a racing series to make it palatable. This means it has to at least try to resemble the real world a bit, since it doesn't lead the way on much any more.
The days of F1 being a test bed for new technologies fell by the way side with the advent of tighter and tighter restrictions on the technology being used. At least now, for the first time since the '90's, it can say it is at least mildly relevant.
You could stick two fingers up to the rest of the world and use pushrod V8's but F1 is supposed to be about pushing the boundaries of technology as well as being a racing series.
I would say a screaming V8/10/12 has much more brand appeal to the likes of Ferrari, McLaren even Mercedes. Im amazed Ferrari agreed to these dreadful wheezy engines, must have been given a s
t load of cash to get them to agree.amgmcqueen said:
How are these current V6 Turbos in any way pushing the boundaries of technology? How do they have any relevance whatsoever to the road cars we drive?
I would say a screaming V8/10/12 has much more brand appeal to the likes of Ferrari, McLaren even Mercedes. Im amazed Ferrari agreed to these dreadful wheezy engines, must have been given a st load of cash to get them to agree.
The new LaFerrari?I would say a screaming V8/10/12 has much more brand appeal to the likes of Ferrari, McLaren even Mercedes. Im amazed Ferrari agreed to these dreadful wheezy engines, must have been given a s
t load of cash to get them to agree.Most current hypercars from the main brands?
Hybrid is the way forward.
Oh and as for money, Ferrari get it anyway as they are loyal to the sport (ish).
Vaud said:
The new LaFerrari?
Most current hypercars from the main brands?
Hybrid is the way forward.
Oh and as for money, Ferrari get it anyway as they are loyal to the sport (ish).
Hybrid may be the future, however, the way F1 power units work is not the same as the requirements for a road car.Most current hypercars from the main brands?
Hybrid is the way forward.
Oh and as for money, Ferrari get it anyway as they are loyal to the sport (ish).
I would argue Toyota etc have already developed more 'real world' hybrid systems already, the only bit that's likely to be used (and has been already before F1) is electric coupled turbo's.
Road cars simply do not need to be able to dump 4Mj of power in 30 sec's, they need to store shedloads more than this over a much longer timeframe.
Scuffers said:
Hybrid may be the future, however, the way F1 power units work is not the same as the requirements for a road car.
I would argue Toyota etc have already developed more 'real world' hybrid systems already, the only bit that's likely to be used (and has been already before F1) is electric coupled turbo's.
Road cars simply do not need to be able to dump 4Mj of power in 30 sec's, they need to store shedloads more than this over a much longer timeframe.
Sorry, to be clear, I meant from a marketing perspective - rather than the myth of "F1 tech is in your car ".I would argue Toyota etc have already developed more 'real world' hybrid systems already, the only bit that's likely to be used (and has been already before F1) is electric coupled turbo's.
Road cars simply do not need to be able to dump 4Mj of power in 30 sec's, they need to store shedloads more than this over a much longer timeframe.
,
The noise of an old school engine is the only thing missing from them really.
Road car tech is very much being driven down the line of small, forced induction engines with electrical assistance. Be it from range extenders or hybrids. F1 has to at least pretend to be relevant to the real world and for the first time in years, then I can see how some of the knowledge being gleaned in competition could trickle into a road car programme. Battery charging and energy recovery, battery design or even turbo design and packaging.
The marketing of this technology is not just for the average punter, though I very much think you are underestimating the number of people who do find these smaller and more efficient engines more appealing, but also it is about engine manufacturers marketing themselves to regulators and governments. If they simply shoved 2 fingers up to the environmental movement by just running old school n/a engines, then that would be a very silly thing for them to do.
amgmcqueen said:
How are these current V6 Turbos in any way pushing the boundaries of technology? How do they have any relevance whatsoever to the road cars we drive?
I would say a screaming V8/10/12 has much more brand appeal to the likes of Ferrari, McLaren even Mercedes. Im amazed Ferrari agreed to these dreadful wheezy engines, must have been given a st load of cash to get them to agree.
Wheezy engines? I don't think so! These power units comprehensively outgun the old V8's. They are marvels really, hugely powerful, compact, reliable and fuel efficient. The only problem with them is how they've been marketed.I would say a screaming V8/10/12 has much more brand appeal to the likes of Ferrari, McLaren even Mercedes. Im amazed Ferrari agreed to these dreadful wheezy engines, must have been given a s
t load of cash to get them to agree.The noise of an old school engine is the only thing missing from them really.
Road car tech is very much being driven down the line of small, forced induction engines with electrical assistance. Be it from range extenders or hybrids. F1 has to at least pretend to be relevant to the real world and for the first time in years, then I can see how some of the knowledge being gleaned in competition could trickle into a road car programme. Battery charging and energy recovery, battery design or even turbo design and packaging.
The marketing of this technology is not just for the average punter, though I very much think you are underestimating the number of people who do find these smaller and more efficient engines more appealing, but also it is about engine manufacturers marketing themselves to regulators and governments. If they simply shoved 2 fingers up to the environmental movement by just running old school n/a engines, then that would be a very silly thing for them to do.
I can see what they're trying to do. F1 tends to go in cycles and manufacturer interest seems to be on the wane at the moment. If/when Renault quit, the "garagistes" might need an engine supplier to fill the gap.
Problem is, they have to make the "standard" engine competitive enough for teams to want to use it, but presumably not better than existing power units? That's going to be difficult for a Cosworth-alike.
Problem is, they have to make the "standard" engine competitive enough for teams to want to use it, but presumably not better than existing power units? That's going to be difficult for a Cosworth-alike.
This talk of standard engines is of course all designed to bring the manufacturers back in to line as they have refused to supply engines to Red Bull and many of you are falling for this.
In other stories fans have voted overwhelmingly in favour of Red Bull leaving F1, so saying that standard engines are needed for Red Bull is not going to go down well!
I think engines etc are a red herring. The issue with F1 at the moment is that Bernie is trying to get too much money, he has taken the TV coverage to pay TV which has put a lot of people off, and many of them have reduced the amount they watch, people are fed up with the whinging of Red Bull, the treatment of Manor etc and no longer care.
As someone in a thread said when Ratner said his products were crap and related them to a M&S sandwich it wasnt great for his sales, its the same for F1.
In other stories fans have voted overwhelmingly in favour of Red Bull leaving F1, so saying that standard engines are needed for Red Bull is not going to go down well!
I think engines etc are a red herring. The issue with F1 at the moment is that Bernie is trying to get too much money, he has taken the TV coverage to pay TV which has put a lot of people off, and many of them have reduced the amount they watch, people are fed up with the whinging of Red Bull, the treatment of Manor etc and no longer care.
As someone in a thread said when Ratner said his products were crap and related them to a M&S sandwich it wasnt great for his sales, its the same for F1.
Derek Smith said:
Bernie is the rights holder/Promoter....He should have nothing to do with regs/ rules, etc The running/ governance of the sport is a shambles.
Scuffers said:
all this talk of Cosworth, the bit that made F1 engines simply does not exist any more, to start it up again will require a huge bag of cash and time.
Hmmmm. Now who in F1 has a huge bag of cash? In a recent interview with Brundle, Bernie mentioned needing a new Cosworth. I'm sure he could resurrect the firm if he needed or wanted to and it fitted his objectives.I suspect however that Ilmor would be a more viable option. Which is ironic given that a few years ago they were owned by Merc.
I just had a thought..
instead of a new supplier with a 2.2 twin turbo and less complex hybrid setup, how about reducing currently cost and complexity to provide a cheaper engine.
Existing 1.6 Turbo ICE
Simple Kers
allow slightly faster fuel flow.
In my mind this works, cars lose maybe 80bhp from the simpler KERS systems but have the opportunity to use a little more fuel and get this back. The issue they will of course have is that fuel capacity is limited so they wont be able to use this extra fuel all the time they would have to be selective whereas the full fat engines get the full boost whenever its available. If cars are pretty much bang on the weigh limit now they would need to add ballast to counteract the lower weight of the car with some KERS equipment being removed.
instead of a new supplier with a 2.2 twin turbo and less complex hybrid setup, how about reducing currently cost and complexity to provide a cheaper engine.
Existing 1.6 Turbo ICE
Simple Kers
allow slightly faster fuel flow.
In my mind this works, cars lose maybe 80bhp from the simpler KERS systems but have the opportunity to use a little more fuel and get this back. The issue they will of course have is that fuel capacity is limited so they wont be able to use this extra fuel all the time they would have to be selective whereas the full fat engines get the full boost whenever its available. If cars are pretty much bang on the weigh limit now they would need to add ballast to counteract the lower weight of the car with some KERS equipment being removed.
andburg said:
I just had a thought..
instead of a new supplier with a 2.2 twin turbo and less complex hybrid setup, how about reducing currently cost and complexity to provide a cheaper engine.
Existing 1.6 Turbo ICE
Simple Kers
allow slightly faster fuel flow.
In my mind this works, cars lose maybe 80bhp from the simpler KERS systems but have the opportunity to use a little more fuel and get this back. The issue they will of course have is that fuel capacity is limited so they wont be able to use this extra fuel all the time they would have to be selective whereas the full fat engines get the full boost whenever its available. If cars are pretty much bang on the weigh limit now they would need to add ballast to counteract the lower weight of the car with some KERS equipment being removed.
pointless, they have already spent the money developing what they have, you're suggesting they write this off and start again?instead of a new supplier with a 2.2 twin turbo and less complex hybrid setup, how about reducing currently cost and complexity to provide a cheaper engine.
Existing 1.6 Turbo ICE
Simple Kers
allow slightly faster fuel flow.
In my mind this works, cars lose maybe 80bhp from the simpler KERS systems but have the opportunity to use a little more fuel and get this back. The issue they will of course have is that fuel capacity is limited so they wont be able to use this extra fuel all the time they would have to be selective whereas the full fat engines get the full boost whenever its available. If cars are pretty much bang on the weigh limit now they would need to add ballast to counteract the lower weight of the car with some KERS equipment being removed.
Merc/Ferrari etc will not stand for that.
No I think you misunderstood my intention.
Bernie wants a cheaper engine to run alongside, my idea was instead of the 2.2 running alongside the current PU as it would gives a budget option without developing a new power unit.
Its pointless anyway, Merc reportedly offered the idea of a slightly lower spec engine cheap to its customers and every one rejected it. Teams would rather pay full whack for the best engine because its cheaper to gain 0.5s a lap from an engine than it is from aero!
Bernie wants a cheaper engine to run alongside, my idea was instead of the 2.2 running alongside the current PU as it would gives a budget option without developing a new power unit.
Its pointless anyway, Merc reportedly offered the idea of a slightly lower spec engine cheap to its customers and every one rejected it. Teams would rather pay full whack for the best engine because its cheaper to gain 0.5s a lap from an engine than it is from aero!
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff