Ferrari: Enginegate

Ferrari: Enginegate

Author
Discussion

CoolHands

11,570 posts

154 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
How can burning oil help speed / power? Oil is a crap fuel?

Andy S15

399 posts

86 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
I'll still wait and see a comparison once Merc have sewn up the WDC. I'm still convinced they are running significantly 'safe' maps while they cruise to the finish, so it's not an accurate comparison, and hasn't been for a few races now.

Kraken

1,557 posts

159 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
CoolHands said:
How can burning oil help speed / power? Oil is a crap fuel?
OIl is a petroleum product at the end of the day. We're not talking 20w50 Castrol.

TheDeuce

7,644 posts

25 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Kenny Powers said:
Nexus Icon said:
Kenny Powers said:
Even when a following Mercedes with slipstream and DRS can barely keep up? Seems there’s probably a little more to it than just a lower-drag aero package??
Aero is king. Red Bull have never won a race on engine power and Williams are tooling around at the back, 3-4 seconds off the pace, with the same power Lewis Hamilton has under his right foot.
I don’t doubt it, but when a Mercedes is driving through a Ferrari-sized hole in the air, AND has its rear wing wide open, and still can’t catch up, it seems to me that there’s a very sizeable power advantage at play. Not that I’m an expert by any means, but something about it all just seems a bit Whacky Races, in my opinion. We’ll probably never know for sure anyway.
I doubt there's a sizeable power difference between any of the PU's on the grid, at most maybe +/- a few percent.

As nexus and deesee have said, the killer difference is aero. The Ferrari is extremely slippery hence the straight line speed - and as a side effect a slippery car also offers a reduced advantage to anyone trying to pick up a tow - to use your analogy, it's punching less of a hole in the air than a less slippery car would.

Ferrari have wisely sacrificed a little of their high speed aero for improved down force, the results have shown on track. But they're still nowhere like as fast and planted through the corners as the Mercs or red bulls, which explains why niether of those cars can keep up on the straights.

Top speed = horsepower minus drag. Without knowing the exact figure for one of those factors we can't know what the other is. Although my personal assumption is that so late on in this era, assuming no major cheating, both should be very close in terms of power output.

Rotary Potato

61 posts

55 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
CoolHands said:
How can burning oil help speed / power? Oil is a crap fuel?
2 things to consider ...

1. If it's not being tested by the FIA, and still performs its primary 'stated' purpose (heat transfer away from the inlet airflow), then there are all sorts of things that could be done to it by very clever lab techs in order to make it less crap.

2. When overall fuel flow is limited, then any extra on top of that (even if it isn't optimum race fuel) is going to give you an advantage over someone who doesn't have it. Even if it's only 20% as efficient as race fuel - number picked completely out of my head - then it's still better than nothing, which is what the other teams have.

MartG

16,731 posts

163 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
CoolHands said:
How can burning oil help speed / power? Oil is a crap fuel?
Even 'oil' which has a high percentage of something like nitromethane ?

Deesee

4,662 posts

42 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Just imagine what they put in kimis drinks bottle all those races ago hehe

jsf

19,649 posts

195 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Rotary Potato said:
2 things to consider ...

1. If it's not being tested by the FIA, and still performs its primary 'stated' purpose (heat transfer away from the inlet airflow), then there are all sorts of things that could be done to it by very clever lab techs in order to make it less crap.

2. When overall fuel flow is limited, then any extra on top of that (even if it isn't optimum race fuel) is going to give you an advantage over someone who doesn't have it. Even if it's only 20% as efficient as race fuel - number picked completely out of my head - then it's still better than nothing, which is what the other teams have.
If there were any fluids entering the inlet track in such a way as some suggest here, then that breaches the rules in such a way they would be excluded from the championship and fined heavily. The rules are explicit on this, it would be the equivalent of the Toyota inlet restrictor cheat on the WRC car which saw the team banned from the sport for years.

That is completely different to the previous oil consumption from the breather system, which was eventually outlawed by venting the breathers to atmosphere and limiting the engine oil consumption use during a race.

Kenny Powers

2,618 posts

86 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
I doubt there's a sizeable power difference between any of the PU's on the grid, at most maybe +/- a few percent.

As nexus and deesee have said, the killer difference is aero. The Ferrari is extremely slippery hence the straight line speed - and as a side effect a slippery car also offers a reduced advantage to anyone trying to pick up a tow - to use your analogy, it's punching less of a hole in the air than a less slippery car would.

Ferrari have wisely sacrificed a little of their high speed aero for improved down force, the results have shown on track. But they're still nowhere like as fast and planted through the corners as the Mercs or red bulls, which explains why niether of those cars can keep up on the straights.

Top speed = horsepower minus drag. Without knowing the exact figure for one of those factors we can't know what the other is. Although my personal assumption is that so late on in this era, assuming no major cheating, both should be very close in terms of power output.
All valid points, and I understand that aero is critical, but personally I still struggle to believe that a slippery F1 car is more slippery than one following in its wake with DRS wide open. But as I've said I'm far from an expert, more of an armchair commentator, so I'm happy to take onboard the views of those who are more informed.

TheDeuce

7,644 posts

25 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Kenny Powers said:
TheDeuce said:
I doubt there's a sizeable power difference between any of the PU's on the grid, at most maybe +/- a few percent.

As nexus and deesee have said, the killer difference is aero. The Ferrari is extremely slippery hence the straight line speed - and as a side effect a slippery car also offers a reduced advantage to anyone trying to pick up a tow - to use your analogy, it's punching less of a hole in the air than a less slippery car would.

Ferrari have wisely sacrificed a little of their high speed aero for improved down force, the results have shown on track. But they're still nowhere like as fast and planted through the corners as the Mercs or red bulls, which explains why niether of those cars can keep up on the straights.

Top speed = horsepower minus drag. Without knowing the exact figure for one of those factors we can't know what the other is. Although my personal assumption is that so late on in this era, assuming no major cheating, both should be very close in terms of power output.
All valid points, and I understand that aero is critical, but personally I still struggle to believe that a slippery F1 car is more slippery than one following in its wake with DRS wide open. But as I've said I'm far from an expert, more of an armchair commentator, so I'm happy to take onboard the views of those who are more informed.
The Merc with drs open still getting nowhere close was a little surprising I admit. It may be that somehow Ferrari have found a way to get a notable power advantage over Mercedes. On the other hand, it really could still all be down to aero. We don't know how much aero drag Mercedes have to introduce in order for their car to be the great all rounder it has been this season. But we do know that the faster the cars are going, the more drag is an issue. If the Mercs design means it has to live with a bit more drag than the Ferrari most of the time, then at flat out speeds it will be living with a lot more drag.

The drs flap only removes drag from the rear, the rest of their fixed aero package is still creating more downforce, hence drag than the Ferrari has.

NewUsername

925 posts

15 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Kenny Powers said:
TheDeuce said:
I doubt there's a sizeable power difference between any of the PU's on the grid, at most maybe +/- a few percent.

As nexus and deesee have said, the killer difference is aero. The Ferrari is extremely slippery hence the straight line speed - and as a side effect a slippery car also offers a reduced advantage to anyone trying to pick up a tow - to use your analogy, it's punching less of a hole in the air than a less slippery car would.

Ferrari have wisely sacrificed a little of their high speed aero for improved down force, the results have shown on track. But they're still nowhere like as fast and planted through the corners as the Mercs or red bulls, which explains why niether of those cars can keep up on the straights.

Top speed = horsepower minus drag. Without knowing the exact figure for one of those factors we can't know what the other is. Although my personal assumption is that so late on in this era, assuming no major cheating, both should be very close in terms of power output.
All valid points, and I understand that aero is critical, but personally I still struggle to believe that a slippery F1 car is more slippery than one following in its wake with DRS wide open. But as I've said I'm far from an expert, more of an armchair commentator, so I'm happy to take onboard the views of those who are more informed.
I think topspeed = Horespower - drag is a little simple, having done a few topspeed events myself id say gearing is critical.....I know these teams have to use the same ratios all year without changing, is Ferrari's gearing better suited to top speed along with their engine gains

TheDeuce

7,644 posts

25 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
NewUsername said:
I think topspeed = Horespower - drag is a little simple, having done a few topspeed events myself id say gearing is critical.....I know these teams have to use the same ratios all year without changing, is Ferrari's gearing better suited to top speed along with their engine gains
Gearing won't affect ultimate top speed unless the ratios result in the car being rpm limited. In the end, whatever the ratio the car will (eventually..) get to the same top speed, which is in basic terms dictated by power minus drag. Drag being the principal residence to velocity. Other factors such as rolling resistance also play a very small factor.

That's not to say gearing can't help at top speed events, because at almost all such events acceleration is important to reach the highest top speed in the space available - which is typically not the actual top speed of the car.


Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 22 October 14:48

NewUsername

925 posts

15 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
.

That's not to say gearing can't help at top speed events, because at almost all such events acceleration is important to reach the highest top speed in the space available -

Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 22 October 14:48
Exactly the point i'm making, I don't think that the cars are hitting the limiter on all the straights on all the circuits...... so they are space limited on many occasions.

Its probably nothing to do with it but gearing could be a small factor

Deesee

4,662 posts

42 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
NewUsername said:
TheDeuce said:
.

That's not to say gearing can't help at top speed events, because at almost all such events acceleration is important to reach the highest top speed in the space available -

Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 22 October 14:48
Exactly the point i'm making, I don't think that the cars are hitting the limiter on all the straights on all the circuits...... so they are space limited on many occasions.

Its probably nothing to do with it but gearing could be a small factor
They get no where near the limit, they will shift up at circa 11500, getting to the RPM limit is no good for fuel, the electrical power helps them so much now, Merc may be mapped and geared for lower speed corners, Ferrari out of medium speed corners for example.

These guys are doing a little feature on the ERS systems every race, worth looking At

https://twitter.com/marellitech/status/11825816063...

TheDeuce

7,644 posts

25 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
NewUsername said:
Exactly the point i'm making, I don't think that the cars are hitting the limiter on all the straights on all the circuits...... so they are space limited on many occasions.

Its probably nothing to do with it but gearing could be a small factor
I'm not actually sure if they are gear/rpm limited when they're flat out, or if it's just the power runs out vs resistance. And yes, most of the time they don't get the opportunity to reach their theoretical top speed, but also in many places, they do... Purely because they have massive power and are comparatively small in mass terms - it doesn't take very much space (compared to a normal car) for an F1 car to be flat out.


TheDeuce

7,644 posts

25 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Deesee said:
They get no where near the limit, they will shift up at circa 11500, getting to the RPM limit is no good for fuel, the electrical power helps them so much now, Merc may be mapped and geared for lower speed corners, Ferrari out of medium speed corners for example.

These guys are doing a little feature on the ERS systems every race, worth looking At

https://twitter.com/marellitech/status/11825816063...
In terms of top speed though? In top gear, if they're attacking/defending, I'm guessing they don't choose to lift at 11500 just to save a little fuel. I had assumed they simply hit the limit of the power they have somewhere ahead of reaching the end of the final gear?

Kenny Powers

2,618 posts

86 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Do the regulations allow the teams to choose their own final drive ratios per circuit? I would presume so but have no idea if that is the case.

NewUsername

925 posts

15 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
Kenny Powers said:
Do the regulations allow the teams to choose their own final drive ratios per circuit? I would presume so but have no idea if that is the case.
No, the ratios for the season are fixed from before race 1 onwards

NewUsername

925 posts

15 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
Deesee said:
They get no where near the limit, they will shift up at circa 11500, getting to the RPM limit is no good for fuel, the electrical power helps them so much now, Merc may be mapped and geared for lower speed corners, Ferrari out of medium speed corners for example.

These guys are doing a little feature on the ERS systems every race, worth looking At

https://twitter.com/marellitech/status/11825816063...
In terms of top speed though? In top gear, if they're attacking/defending, I'm guessing they don't choose to lift at 11500 just to save a little fuel. I had assumed they simply hit the limit of the power they have somewhere ahead of reaching the end of the final gear?
I've often seen onboards of cars on the limiter in top at places like Spa/Monza.....?

Deesee

4,662 posts

42 months

Tuesday 22nd October 2019
quotequote all
TheDeuce said:
Deesee said:
They get no where near the limit, they will shift up at circa 11500, getting to the RPM limit is no good for fuel, the electrical power helps them so much now, Merc may be mapped and geared for lower speed corners, Ferrari out of medium speed corners for example.

These guys are doing a little feature on the ERS systems every race, worth looking At

https://twitter.com/marellitech/status/11825816063...
In terms of top speed though? In top gear, if they're attacking/defending, I'm guessing they don't choose to lift at 11500 just to save a little fuel. I had assumed they simply hit the limit of the power they have somewhere ahead of reaching the end of the final gear?
Here’s Grosjean down the straight at Baku at high speed.. I’m try to think of a good section through the gears to so the upshifts.. name one and I’ll put it up in video form as such.

DEESEE (@DEESEE15723775) Tweeted:
Baku https://t.co/Nekmdccgru

NB, Baku is quite an extreme example, as I'm sure its the longest full power stretch on the calendar, and Romain, was fastest through the trap in Q1, so that's why i used that, maxed out at just above 12000 rpm.


Edited by Deesee on Tuesday 22 October 16:38