Two Stroke engines for 2025
Discussion
thegreenhell said:
I don't think we'll see it until Ferrari have a 2 stroke road car on the drawing board. They won't want to spend hundreds of millions on something so different that has zero relevance to the rest of their business, and will likely enforce their veto if necessary.
I suppose, having knowledge that Ferrari may well feel that way, the technical team FOM assemble would know they need to demonstrate very early on that such a power unit can produce the required power, reliability and also sound better than what is in use today. In a nutshell, prove two stroke can be sexy - if they can't do that, I would agree that it would be a very hard sell to anyone, most of all Ferrari.If it can be proven however, no reason Ferrari wouldn't want a 12 bank two stroke (for example) if it gives them another 'green' engine technology for their road cars and allows them to justify not going full electric for another several years. There is serious research in to two stroke right now, so I'm thinking the technology, in hybrid form, could conceivably better four stroke for however long ICE itself has left.
Isn’t this just the last gasps of ICE F1!? I genuinely don’t see much of a future for ICE F1 due to both the mandated end of the ICE due to stricter emissions standards and the scrutiny of the F1 circus carbon footprint. As an F1 fan, I’ll of course be sad to see it go, but major change seems inevitable.
rog007 said:
Isn’t this just the last gasps of ICE F1!? I genuinely don’t see much of a future for ICE F1 due to both the mandated end of the ICE due to stricter emissions standards and the scrutiny of the F1 circus carbon footprint. As an F1 fan, I’ll of course be sad to see it go, but major change seems inevitable.
It is the last gasp. It's a side step ahead of taking the brave step forward. Not just F1 though... Since this story I've been reading a lot and a hell of a lot of people are looking at two stroke as an ICE compliment to electric power in hybrid form for road cars. Turns out that with modern engine management two stroke is potentially more efficient than four stroke. Although, it's not two stroke as we know it... Opposed pistons all the way.
rog007 said:
Isn’t this just the last gasps of ICE F1!? I genuinely don’t see much of a future for ICE F1 due to both the mandated end of the ICE due to stricter emissions standards and the scrutiny of the F1 circus carbon footprint. As an F1 fan, I’ll of course be sad to see it go, but major change seems inevitable.
I don’t think the fuel the cars use is a big part of the carbon foot print ?Exige77 said:
I don’t think the fuel the cars use is a big part of the carbon foot print ?
It's probably less than 1%. But in terms of perception and image, it's huge. I'm not really a fan of how 'carbon nuetral' is calculated but their target of acheiving it is technically possible. If at the same time they can get the PU from 50% efficiency to 60% then they can claim to have the most energy efficient PU in the world of motorsport for several more years.
It's all irrelevant really, F1 could burn 10x the carbon it does today and it would still be efficient in terms of how many people it entertains for the sake of some fossil fuel. But they care about hitting Impressive eco targets as it gives them ammunition when the greens inevitably question how socially responsible the F1 circus is.
TheDeuce said:
Exige77 said:
I don’t think the fuel the cars use is a big part of the carbon foot print ?
It's probably less than 1%. But in terms of perception and image, it's huge. I'm not really a fan of how 'carbon nuetral' is calculated but their target of acheiving it is technically possible. If at the same time they can get the PU from 50% efficiency to 60% then they can claim to have the most energy efficient PU in the world of motorsport for several more years.
It's all irrelevant really, F1 could burn 10x the carbon it does today and it would still be efficient in terms of how many people it entertains for the sake of some fossil fuel. But they care about hitting Impressive eco targets as it gives them ammunition when the greens inevitably question how socially responsible the F1 circus is.
It was relevant when the future of road transport was oil based but it’s clearly moving to electric (or other) alternatives.
Making F1 engines road relevant is no longer an issue so no point in spending millions / billions on on tech that can save 20/30Ltrs of fuel per car.
The lawnmowers at most circuits probably use more fuel.
F1’s fuel usage is tiny compared to motorsport usage around the world.
Exige77 said:
It’s much much less than that. Not significant at all. The staff driving to the circuit use much more than that.
It was relevant when the future of road transport was oil based but it’s clearly moving to electric (or other) alternatives.
Making F1 engines road relevant is no longer an issue so no point in spending millions / billions on on tech that can save 20/30Ltrs of fuel per car.
The lawnmowers at most circuits probably use more fuel.
F1’s fuel usage is tiny compared to motorsport usage around the world.
All sound minded people know the above. But there are millions more headline reading mentalists in the world - they won't accept F1 is reasonable until certain statements can be made. 'greenest engine ever created' is the sort of statement required to shut up such people.It was relevant when the future of road transport was oil based but it’s clearly moving to electric (or other) alternatives.
Making F1 engines road relevant is no longer an issue so no point in spending millions / billions on on tech that can save 20/30Ltrs of fuel per car.
The lawnmowers at most circuits probably use more fuel.
F1’s fuel usage is tiny compared to motorsport usage around the world.
I know it's farcical. Image these days is apparently more important than reality..
That nice f1elvis bloke did a quick explaination of the new 2 stroke ideas.Not sure about the lube situation but it is more efficient.
Not sure what message its sends but I guess it takes one engine supplier to come in with it if allowed by the rules.
No need for everyone else to start panicking and tool up till they start getting challenged.
They are hardly going to go from nothing to winning overnight.
That Alonso fellow has jumping in with the new 2stroke team written all over him as usual for several more wilderness years.
Not sure what message its sends but I guess it takes one engine supplier to come in with it if allowed by the rules.
No need for everyone else to start panicking and tool up till they start getting challenged.
They are hardly going to go from nothing to winning overnight.
That Alonso fellow has jumping in with the new 2stroke team written all over him as usual for several more wilderness years.
Exige77 said:
rog007 said:
Isn’t this just the last gasps of ICE F1!? I genuinely don’t see much of a future for ICE F1 due to both the mandated end of the ICE due to stricter emissions standards and the scrutiny of the F1 circus carbon footprint. As an F1 fan, I’ll of course be sad to see it go, but major change seems inevitable.
I don’t think the fuel the cars use is a big part of the carbon foot print ?Fundoreen said:
That nice f1elvis bloke did a quick explaination of the new 2 stroke ideas.Not sure about the lube situation but it is more efficient.
Not sure what message its sends but I guess it takes one engine supplier to come in with it if allowed by the rules.
No need for everyone else to start panicking and tool up till they start getting challenged.
They are hardly going to go from nothing to winning overnight.
That Alonso fellow has jumping in with the new 2stroke team written all over him as usual for several more wilderness years.
It's all or nothing. If the rules change regarding engine spec then all teams would need to switch. It's not a case of one team trying out 2 stroke to see how it goes.Not sure what message its sends but I guess it takes one engine supplier to come in with it if allowed by the rules.
No need for everyone else to start panicking and tool up till they start getting challenged.
They are hardly going to go from nothing to winning overnight.
That Alonso fellow has jumping in with the new 2stroke team written all over him as usual for several more wilderness years.
Although once upon a time it was more like that, and freeing the engine formula today might be fun! I'm guessing that the winners would opt for an increase in electric power if they had free reign.
Gordon Murray mentioned in a podcast once that he was going to ask Alfa to build him an extreme narrow angle V12 two stroke for Fancar Mk2 if it had gone ahead. The reason for this was something to do keeping the engine within the perfect power band for not only for outright speed/torque but to drive the two variable pitch fans that would alter the level of suction on the car through its position on the track. (Far too technical for me to remember exactly.)
What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
The Hypno-Toad said:
Gordon Murray mentioned in a podcast once that he was going to ask Alfa to build him an extreme narrow angle V12 two stroke for Fancar Mk2 if it had gone ahead. The reason for this was something to do keeping the engine within the perfect power band for not only for outright speed/torque but to drive the two variable pitch fans that would alter the level of suction on the car through its position on the track. (Far too technical for me to remember exactly.)
What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
Threre are actually endless examples of 2 stroke up to around 20k rpm on YouTube. And they really do sound pretty good!What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
2 stroke at high rpm is a good sound. I know everyone is a little doubting today, but it really could be an exciting shift for F1. Why not..?
The Hypno-Toad said:
Gordon Murray mentioned in a podcast once that he was going to ask Alfa to build him an extreme narrow angle V12 two stroke for Fancar Mk2 if it had gone ahead. The reason for this was something to do keeping the engine within the perfect power band for not only for outright speed/torque but to drive the two variable pitch fans that would alter the level of suction on the car through its position on the track. (Far too technical for me to remember exactly.)
What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
Any chance of a link?What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
Duns said:
The Hypno-Toad said:
Gordon Murray mentioned in a podcast once that he was going to ask Alfa to build him an extreme narrow angle V12 two stroke for Fancar Mk2 if it had gone ahead. The reason for this was something to do keeping the engine within the perfect power band for not only for outright speed/torque but to drive the two variable pitch fans that would alter the level of suction on the car through its position on the track. (Far too technical for me to remember exactly.)
What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
Any chance of a link?What I do remember is that he wanted it to rev to 16000 rpm which would have made the noise extraordinary.
TheDeuce said:
All sound minded people know the above. But there are millions more headline reading mentalists in the world - they won't accept F1 is reasonable until certain statements can be made. 'greenest engine ever created' is the sort of statement required to shut up such people.
I know it's farcical. Image these days is apparently more important than reality..
F 1 is anything but 'reasonable' - I have loved it for decades but at its heart it is an absurd sport , unrivalled in its profligacy . Half a billion quid to race two cars twenty times a year for 90 minutes, consuming 12 tyres per race in the process ? It's not just about image , it's also about reality, So what if the engine only (only ...) uses 100 kilos of gas per race - anyone not interested might reasonably say -'what for , exactly ?'I know it's farcical. Image these days is apparently more important than reality..
. Take a step back ,and try to see ourselves as other see us - do you really believe anyone who doesn't like F1 is ...er... 'a mentalist' ? (copyright J Clarkson 2002 ? )
coppice said:
F 1 is anything but 'reasonable' - I have loved it for decades but at its heart it is an absurd sport , unrivalled in its profligacy . Half a billion quid to race two cars twenty times a year for 90 minutes, consuming 12 tyres per race in the process ? It's not just about image , it's also about reality, So what if the engine only (only ...) uses 100 kilos of gas per race - anyone not interested might reasonably say -'what for , exactly ?'
. Take a step back ,and try to see ourselves as other see us - do you really believe anyone who doesn't like F1 is ...er... 'a mentalist' ? (copyright J Clarkson 2002 ? )
That's my point really... I'm not saying F1 is reasonable, but I can understand that liberty want to change that image. I completely agree that anyone who looks at the sport in detail won't be fooled! But for the headline readers and casual viewers, engine efficiency is a good message. . Take a step back ,and try to see ourselves as other see us - do you really believe anyone who doesn't like F1 is ...er... 'a mentalist' ? (copyright J Clarkson 2002 ? )
Although to take it a step further... In a way it is reasonable that a sport that brings joy to so many million fans might be forgiven for burning through tyres, fuel and cash. On a 'per viewer' basis the sports negative impact is fractional. But that's logic, not image.
Did JC really invent that word!? If so... Maniac.
TheDeuce said:
That's my point really... I'm not saying F1 is reasonable, but I can understand that liberty want to change that image. I completely agree that anyone who looks at the sport in detail won't be fooled! But for the headline readers and casual viewers, engine efficiency is a good message.
Although to take it a step further... In a way it is reasonable that a sport that brings joy to so many million fans might be forgiven for burning through tyres, fuel and cash. On a 'per viewer' basis the sports negative impact is fractional. But that's logic, not image.
Did JC really invent that word!? If so... Maniac.
I'm sure you're right that, on a global scale, F1's emissions are not really significant; but it is because it has millions of viewers that it must change. It has the power to demonstrate that change is possible, to inspire, influence behaviour and trickle-down technology.Although to take it a step further... In a way it is reasonable that a sport that brings joy to so many million fans might be forgiven for burning through tyres, fuel and cash. On a 'per viewer' basis the sports negative impact is fractional. But that's logic, not image.
Did JC really invent that word!? If so... Maniac.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff