New engine regs for 2021
Discussion
MartG said:
CraigyMc said:
I think perhaps what was mooted would be more sensibly explained as a spec-engine, which would of course make all the motor companies very unhappy, and would lead to ferrari-branded toys all over the floor.
Though of course the race teams, as distinct from the manufacturer teams, would probably welcome a supply of relatively cheap engines giving a level playing field as far as power is concerned. Almost like a return to the mid-70s when everyone except Ferrari ( and occasionally Matra/BRM/Techno/Alfa ) had a DFV bolted to the back of their chassis, and so many teams could afford to enter they had to do pre-qualifying !I will also add that I've quite enjoyed the technical battle this year. The way three cars with very different approaches have come so much closer together in performance is fantastic. Simplifying the PU too much effectively removes one of the two major aspects of competition - I'd rather see more flexibility to have more varied approaches but that off course can lead to excessive periods of dominance (as we have seen with these PUs and blown diffusers etc).
If they want to make it truly road-relevant for the OEMs, they should open up the configuration so they can do whatever they want provided it's based on one of the manufacturers' own road engines. Maybe stipulate that the engine has to have been built in at least 1000 units, and keep the current fuel limits to keep a lid on power and stop Ferrari turning up with an engine from a new (fictional) quad-turbo V12 LaFerrari against a Honda Civic or Renault Twizzy.
I think engine manufacturers should be given more freedom to design their engines. For instance giving them a fixed engine capacity but let them decide weather to go single/twin turbo, supercharged, na etc but to keep costs down they have to maintain their chosen setup for the whole season.
Gad-Westy said:
Exactly the point that I made in the bit of my post chopped off. If F1 can't be relevant anyway, let's go back to making it spectacular.
I didnt mean to paraphrase or repeat what you said so much as come at it from a different angle but I think I just rambled around full circle. If you'd proposed a single engine supplier 10 years I'd have told you to F.R.O. but now I wonder if its inevitable, and as such something best undertaken sooner rather than later?
Of course the manufacturer teams wont like that and bring a lot of $$$ and power, but even thats small compared to the what, 2 billion odd annual chest from tv rights, hosting etc that F1 commands?
Megaflow said:
jsf said:
Stock block engines are never going to be an answer for a modern F1 formula.
They didn't do BMW any harm in the 1980's... 
CraigyMc said:
Cosworth had a V8 running over 315bhp/l in the CA2006. That was the engine they made a video of, doing 20,000rpm on the dyno during development.
It's not alone - the BMW P83 was making similar specific output numbers in 2003 (V10).
I propose that the remainder would be made up for with the technology that has evolved over the 13 years since that was being developed: lighter, stronger pistons, higher revs, lower friction surfaces, CFD+FEA of the structures and flows.
The reason why revlimits were imposed on F1 in 2007 was that the big engine manufacturers already had designs on the go for 21,000rpm and 22,000rpm engines, which were getting to the "this is silly, these are as disposable as a packet of crisps" levels of manufacturing, and the costs associated with it were totally out of hand.
This led to the strangling of the V8s for 2007 - first with a 19K rpm limit, then latterly the introduction of an 18K limit and subsequent requirements for the motors to be used for more than one event, FIA-dictated maximum bore size (which essentially dictated stroke and consequently mean piston speed) etc.
Put it another way: given that 315bhp/l NA engines raced in 2006, why do you think 330bhp/l isn't realistic with modern development processes?
our last spec CA team engines in 2013 made 782 BhpIt's not alone - the BMW P83 was making similar specific output numbers in 2003 (V10).
I propose that the remainder would be made up for with the technology that has evolved over the 13 years since that was being developed: lighter, stronger pistons, higher revs, lower friction surfaces, CFD+FEA of the structures and flows.
The reason why revlimits were imposed on F1 in 2007 was that the big engine manufacturers already had designs on the go for 21,000rpm and 22,000rpm engines, which were getting to the "this is silly, these are as disposable as a packet of crisps" levels of manufacturing, and the costs associated with it were totally out of hand.
This led to the strangling of the V8s for 2007 - first with a 19K rpm limit, then latterly the introduction of an 18K limit and subsequent requirements for the motors to be used for more than one event, FIA-dictated maximum bore size (which essentially dictated stroke and consequently mean piston speed) etc.
Put it another way: given that 315bhp/l NA engines raced in 2006, why do you think 330bhp/l isn't realistic with modern development processes?
so almost there at 325bhp/ltr
Doink said:
Megaflow said:
jsf said:
Stock block engines are never going to be an answer for a modern F1 formula.
They didn't do BMW any harm in the 1980's... 350Matt said:
CraigyMc said:
Cosworth had a V8 running over 315bhp/l in the CA2006. That was the engine they made a video of, doing 20,000rpm on the dyno during development.
It's not alone - the BMW P83 was making similar specific output numbers in 2003 (V10).
I propose that the remainder would be made up for with the technology that has evolved over the 13 years since that was being developed: lighter, stronger pistons, higher revs, lower friction surfaces, CFD+FEA of the structures and flows.
The reason why revlimits were imposed on F1 in 2007 was that the big engine manufacturers already had designs on the go for 21,000rpm and 22,000rpm engines, which were getting to the "this is silly, these are as disposable as a packet of crisps" levels of manufacturing, and the costs associated with it were totally out of hand.
This led to the strangling of the V8s for 2007 - first with a 19K rpm limit, then latterly the introduction of an 18K limit and subsequent requirements for the motors to be used for more than one event, FIA-dictated maximum bore size (which essentially dictated stroke and consequently mean piston speed) etc.
Put it another way: given that 315bhp/l NA engines raced in 2006, why do you think 330bhp/l isn't realistic with modern development processes?
our last spec CA team engines in 2013 made 782 BhpIt's not alone - the BMW P83 was making similar specific output numbers in 2003 (V10).
I propose that the remainder would be made up for with the technology that has evolved over the 13 years since that was being developed: lighter, stronger pistons, higher revs, lower friction surfaces, CFD+FEA of the structures and flows.
The reason why revlimits were imposed on F1 in 2007 was that the big engine manufacturers already had designs on the go for 21,000rpm and 22,000rpm engines, which were getting to the "this is silly, these are as disposable as a packet of crisps" levels of manufacturing, and the costs associated with it were totally out of hand.
This led to the strangling of the V8s for 2007 - first with a 19K rpm limit, then latterly the introduction of an 18K limit and subsequent requirements for the motors to be used for more than one event, FIA-dictated maximum bore size (which essentially dictated stroke and consequently mean piston speed) etc.
Put it another way: given that 315bhp/l NA engines raced in 2006, why do you think 330bhp/l isn't realistic with modern development processes?
so almost there at 325bhp/ltr
PH is awesome sometimes.
Edited to add: Most impressive from 18,000rpm. Shame it was in a Marussia.
Edited by CraigyMc on Friday 10th November 14:41
thegreenhell said:
How scalable are those figures, since we were talking about a 5 litre NA engine? As the swept capacity goes up so does the friction and the rotating masses, but is it proportional or are the achievable specific outputs lower as you get bigger?
Generally to maintain the ability to reach high revs, as capacity goes up so do the number of cylinders, otherwise the mass of pistons and conrods gets too greatListening to Croft and Kravitz bickering aout engines earlier today I realised that F1 has to make a simple decision: Does it stay with current cutting edge "road-car" technology? That's likely to be all electric in 10-15 years, which is barely two PU cycles. Or does it say to hell with that we want noisy, high revving Internal Combustion engines. This will lead to the tech being considered "historic racing" within the same timescale.
It's really not about one or two turbos, or V6 or V8 or I4 engines Or how many MGUs it has. It's about the future direction of the sport. It's a tough decision to make.
It's really not about one or two turbos, or V6 or V8 or I4 engines Or how many MGUs it has. It's about the future direction of the sport. It's a tough decision to make.
Gad-Westy said:
If F1 can't be relevant anyway, let's go back to making it spectacular.
Goodwood Revival have got there first with that one. Power with fairly skinny tyres, seems to be one of their secrets.
Of course they don't tour the world, and it is only once a year, but hugely popular with tickets sold out well before each event.
They never seem to have processional races.
Jon39 said:
Goodwood Revival have got there first with that one. Power with fairly skinny tyres, seems to be one of their secrets.
Of course they don't tour the world, and it is only once a year, but hugely popular with tickets sold out well before each event.
They never seem to have processional races.
Gad-Westy said:
I think it's time that F1 ditched any pretense about aligning with roadcar trends.
Major manufacturers don't seem that invested in hybrids other than the odd handful. It's mainly small capacity turbo charged petrol engines and rapidly-falling-out-of-fashion turbo charged diesel engines and by the time these regs come in, most manufacturers will be heading very rapidly towards EV's which, for now at least, has no place in F1. So it seems to me like the automotive industry is in a transition period as we pass from IC engines to EV's.
So my thoughts, are f
k it and return to V10's and have what might be one last hurrah to big, noisy, inefficient petrol engines. Stick two fingers up to any other agenda and make the cars spectacular again.
That's what I'm dreaming of
. Being more realistic, I'm sure the reality will be more or less exactly what we have now though I'd at least like to see the whole lot simplified a little.
The issue they have is that EV will never take off in motorsport in a big way no matter what they do because quite simply EV cars are boring. They could I guess give them a complicated sound system to generate engine noise and smells but can you imagine how embarrassing that would be. Major manufacturers don't seem that invested in hybrids other than the odd handful. It's mainly small capacity turbo charged petrol engines and rapidly-falling-out-of-fashion turbo charged diesel engines and by the time these regs come in, most manufacturers will be heading very rapidly towards EV's which, for now at least, has no place in F1. So it seems to me like the automotive industry is in a transition period as we pass from IC engines to EV's.
So my thoughts, are f
k it and return to V10's and have what might be one last hurrah to big, noisy, inefficient petrol engines. Stick two fingers up to any other agenda and make the cars spectacular again. That's what I'm dreaming of
. Being more realistic, I'm sure the reality will be more or less exactly what we have now though I'd at least like to see the whole lot simplified a little. Lewis could get his mates to do a mix tape and each driver could have a different sound LOL. I can just hear Martin now. And Lewis is going really well in the Merkanye today...
THIS
So my thoughts, are f
k it and return to V10's and have what might be one last hurrah to big, noisy, inefficient petrol engines. Stick two fingers up to any other agenda and make the cars spectacular again.is what's needed for all forms of motorsport. I would add
f
k noise regs too!! Soul Reaver said:
The issue they have is that EV will never take off in motorsport in a big way no matter what they do because quite simply EV cars are boring.
I think that’s incredibly short sighted and more than likely flat out wrong. Manufacturers and sponsors are pushing heavily in that direction, they will make it work but it’s very early days.It has the potential to be a great thing for Motorsport, particularly for the many, many circuits battling ever stricter noise limits etc.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff