Forumla 1 engines??
Discussion
Well as you say, the high rpms used are primarily where the power comes from.
Formula 1s tick over at 8000rpm(correct me if wrong) and dont make sod all power at those revs.
The fact that they have 10 or 12 cylinders also contributes, as more cylinders equals more work done per revolution, than say a 4 cylinder.
Exhaust headers that make the most of pulse extraction methods further help to raise the power.
Valves that are pneumatically operated,opening and closing in a fraction of a second, engine management that tweaks operating parameters thousands of times per second all do their part too.
Its a symphony of parts all operating at the max to get these kinds of outputs.
Of course, reliability is never going to be on a par with your road car engines.
Old saying regarding rpms:Wear and tear lies up there.
Hope this helps.
Formula 1s tick over at 8000rpm(correct me if wrong) and dont make sod all power at those revs.
The fact that they have 10 or 12 cylinders also contributes, as more cylinders equals more work done per revolution, than say a 4 cylinder.
Exhaust headers that make the most of pulse extraction methods further help to raise the power.
Valves that are pneumatically operated,opening and closing in a fraction of a second, engine management that tweaks operating parameters thousands of times per second all do their part too.
Its a symphony of parts all operating at the max to get these kinds of outputs.
Of course, reliability is never going to be on a par with your road car engines.
Old saying regarding rpms:Wear and tear lies up there.
Hope this helps.
Although obviously impressive, they are not as far from some road engines as you might think. A Suzuki GSXR1000 is up around 150bph from a 1 litre engine nowadays, and a GSXR600 at close to 110. These are 150bhp/litre and 183bhp/litre. At 850bhp, an F1 engine is 280bhp/litre. More, certainly, but not enough more to seem beyond belief.
Actually, given that 850bh is possible from 3 litres, what's the technical problem with the old chestnut of getting 1000 from a 3 litre turbo like a skyline?
Actually, given that 850bh is possible from 3 litres, what's the technical problem with the old chestnut of getting 1000 from a 3 litre turbo like a skyline?
iguana said: The old 1.5litre turbo engines of F1 used to pump out up to around 1500bhp for qualifying
I remember those, they were the Brabham BMW engines the most powerfull engines built for F1, I believe that the 'race' engines were still around the 1000bhp mark with full boost.
Certainly made for better racing IMHO with the driver having the choice to turn up the boost allowing overtaking at the expense of not finishing due to reliability or running out of petrol(mansell/piquet),
or not turning up the boost and finnishing steadily and possibily a win due to the rest of the field falling by the wayside (Prost).
haven't enjoyed F1 since.
harry
In Autocar's 0-100-0 test Jaguar brought along an R3 with the Cosworth engine. (unfortunately highly geared for Monza) The article claimed the following stats:
3ltr V10
approx - 780bhp @ 18000rpm
- 380lbft
600kg
times: 0-60 2.71
0-100 4.02
0-100-0 5.90
Pretty quick even with tall gears then!
3ltr V10
approx - 780bhp @ 18000rpm
- 380lbft
600kg
times: 0-60 2.71
0-100 4.02
0-100-0 5.90
Pretty quick even with tall gears then!
dimmadan said: F1 engines dont last that long when you think about it, about 300km before rebuild.....eeekkk. even then some blow before, compared with bikes which can go for 16k miles before even adjusting the valves. My bike revs to 14k rpm done 24k miles and not even burning any oil...
Not being a bike follower does that mean/are you saying that GP bikes as well go 16K between rebuilds/top end work then
, if so then that is pretty amazing 
. Harry
Hmmm, id agree about the high outputs from bikes, but measure like for like.
Most bike engines go way up into the revband at anywhere from 12 to 16k.
Car engines rarely go beyond 7k (honda vtec excepted).
The point here is that theyre making more power for the same duration of time simply because theres more power strokes occuring in that time, due to rpm.
Powers just a measure of how much work is being done for a given period of time.
As for them being way ahead of car engines, id say maybe...
For example,cars have long had fuel injection fitted to them, its only very recently that bikes have gone down this route, not that im trying to take anything away from bikes you understand.
Makes you wonder how on earth the internals hang together when some of the peak loadings are calculated, like in the rapid reversal of a piston down the bore at 16k!!!!
All very interesting stuff.
Most bike engines go way up into the revband at anywhere from 12 to 16k.
Car engines rarely go beyond 7k (honda vtec excepted).
The point here is that theyre making more power for the same duration of time simply because theres more power strokes occuring in that time, due to rpm.
Powers just a measure of how much work is being done for a given period of time.
As for them being way ahead of car engines, id say maybe...
For example,cars have long had fuel injection fitted to them, its only very recently that bikes have gone down this route, not that im trying to take anything away from bikes you understand.
Makes you wonder how on earth the internals hang together when some of the peak loadings are calculated, like in the rapid reversal of a piston down the bore at 16k!!!!
All very interesting stuff.
I once read in an article in "Fast Lane" that if there were no rev limiter on an F1 engine, if you could hold the throttle to the floor in neutral for 1 second the engine would theorecically rev to over 120,000rpm. That was a few years ago aswell and the car was a March with a Cosworth engine I think
Andy
Andy
Ok, take it easy on me, but how do F1 engines create ~840BHP from an NA 3litre engine. I know extrememly high revs, ~18,000, help but I'm sure there is more to it than that. And also, how can they last that long with the crap getting kicked out of them during a race?
well isn't it obvious!?!
take the jaguar engine for example, its one of the most powerfull and built by cosworth.
what they do is get a normal v6 mondeo lump, add 4 cylinders for the hell of it (they don't do anything) then slap a K&N air filter and "rude" bean can exhaust on and this ups the power from circa 200, to over 8 billion horse power
littlegearl said:
Ok, take it easy on me, but how do F1 engines create ~840BHP from an NA 3litre engine. I know extrememly high revs, ~18,000, help but I'm sure there is more to it than that. And also, how can they last that long with the crap getting kicked out of them during a race?
well isn't it obvious!?!
take the jaguar engine for example, its one of the most powerfull and built by cosworth.
what they do is get a normal v6 mondeo lump, add 4 cylinders for the hell of it (they don't do anything) then slap a K&N air filter and "rude" bean can exhaust on and this ups the power from circa 200, to over 8 billion horse power
Stranger things have actually been attempted on the Mondeo lump:
www.carsurvey.org/viewcomments_review_13411.html
ErnestM
Stranger things have actually been attempted on the Mondeo lump:
www.carsurvey.org/viewcomments_review_13411.html
ErnestM
Noble M12 GTO:
Mondeo V6 + twin turbos = 310bhp
deltaf said:
Most bike engines go way up into the revband at anywhere from 12 to 16k.
Makes you wonder how on earth the internals hang together when some of the peak loadings are calculated, like in the rapid reversal of a piston down the bore at 16k!!!!
In OZ where they have different learner laws to the UK (may be dif now- this was 4 yrs ago) the 250cc market which you have to ride for a year is very popular, with lots of 4 stoke 250 verions of bigger sports bikes. Most of these rev to over 20,000rpm, with the little CBR250 having its red line at 22,000rpm!
with not much meaningful power below about 18,000!!!! I know 2 strokes will rev higher- but not by much, but how those little 4 cylinder 4 strokes hold together is amazing!
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff