The V6 Engines

[Incubus]

It's starting to look as though having anything to do with F1 engines when you're anything other than Mercedes engine staff is not great at the moment.
Ferrari engine chief Luca Marmorini appears to have "been retired". Coming a couple of days after the departure of Renault Sport's F1 boss on the back of Red Bull's criticism of his firm's engines, the hunt for scapegoats is well under way for rival Merc's rival engine suppliers.

 

[KekeTheKing]

The other day Joe Saward briefly went into detail about how engine manufacturers are allowed to proceed going forward. Unsurprisingly, it seems incredibly complicated, and with the announcement yesterday that the FIA have finally come to grips with FRIC and it's implications, I find myself wondering, "is there anybody out there that is truly qualified to make sure that teams are adhering to the regulations at all times?"

Check out this passage;

regulators came up with the idea of dividing the parts of F1 power units into three categories, ranked 1, 2 and 3. The total ranking for the parts in an F1 power unit is 66. From this total was derived a system of “tokens” that allow for change. If you redesign your pistons, for example, it will cost you two tokens, while the ignition system is worth only one point. Each year, each manufacturer will be allowed to choose what parts of the engine they wish to develop, based on these tokens, with the annual number of the reducing each year. For 2015, therefore, there will be 32 tokens available, which means that almost half of the components in an engine can be changed. Each year the number of tokens will reduce by around nine percent so that by 2018 there will be only 15 changes allowed each year, which will mean only 23 percent of the parts can be developed.

http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2014/07/08/changing-the-f1-engines-of-today/

I think one of the key things I learned from the article though is that manufacturers are free to change almost half of the components in their powerplant for 2015.

 

[FB]

A Cosworth V6 hybrid turbo F1 engine - apparently Cosworth just need someone to fund the final development.

from here: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/blogs/gravel-trap-is-ford-set-for-a-f1-return-in-2015/

 

[cider_and_toast]

While I get a warm fuzzy feeling to see the Cosworth name in F1, they'll never top the DFV.

I wonder if any team would be brave enough to jump on board.

Could it be a gem or a clunker ??

 

[Andyoak]

I fear the latter... the DFV benefitted from perfect timing in F1 team history and Ford backing. The timing can't be repeated and I don't foresee another manufacturer jumping on board with enough money and commitment to make it work; unless the Chinese or Koreans feel ready for it?

 

[cider_and_toast]

Would be worth a punt for Caterham. They couldn't do any worse than the Renault they have at the moment. It wouldn't be a repeat of the "Max-O-Motor" budget Cosworth. This could be a full on works deal. They'd need to scrape together a few quid from the new owners to chuck into the kitty to get the motor running (pun intended) but the rewards would be good if it got off the ground. Maybe Sauber as well ??

Of course the big problem is it needs cash to run but the front runners don't need it and the back markers couldn't afford it.

 

[FB]

A query for all you techy types. Just watching a re-run of the 1985 Belgian GP, at the height of the first turbo era, none of the cars have air boxes above the drivers heads yet this seasons turbo hybrid cars have the same hideous things as the normally aspirated cars had last year. Is this just because they are single turbos or is there another reason for having the intake where it is?

 

[cider_and_toast]

I assumed way back last year that they wouldn't need the air boxes because of the way they ran in the 80's and would have thought that removing anything that obstructs air flow to the rear wing would be a good idea. However, obviously they must have a reason for keeping them as there is nothing on an F1 car that is their for the sake of it (well, other than Pastor Maldanado anyway).

I know most teams use vents on the side of the air box to cool their ERS systems, I'm also assuming that the air being forced into the air box increases the pressure at the turbo which reduces marginally the amount of effort required to boost the pressure.

Maybe also, but this again is speculation, the airflow is used in some way to reduce the turbo lag by sustaining pressure in the turbine element?

Other than that

 

[The Pits]

i believe it may be as simple as the regs defining the height of the roll hoop, and the designers not wanting to upset the airflow around the sidepods any more than absolutely necessary.

 

[Grizzly]

The pits is right its regulation.

Its not a daft reg though. ...Back in the 80's (when it was acceptable) most forced induction engines were v6 twin turbo, therefore the turbo's logical position was low down in each sidepod. In turn the logical and shortest route for the intake ducting to the compressor is through the little periscope ducts you would have seen on each sidepod. Now, with regulatory single, centrally mounted turbo's, it's perfectly logical to continue with the intake feeding the compressor via the roll hoop.

CaT - its not an airbox as such, like an NA engine enjoys, its just a duct to an air filter of minimal pressure drop...

 

[cider_and_toast]

Grizzly, interesting stuff.

I know the role hoop has to be certain height due to the regs but I just wish someone would try something different with it.

 

[Tuscan1969]

Looks like there are shennanigans with the number of races "scheduled" for next year so that the teams can have 5 engines per car instead of four.....

This got me thinking. The current engine manufacturers have had a year to develop the engines and to see where the weaknesses are, so four should be achievable for them....but what about Honda. They start 2015 effectively where the rest were last year but I see no mention of them being able to use 5 per car to "equalise" for the 12 month lack of running.....

Does anyone really expect Honda to be able to limit the use to 4 ????? Could be a major handicap for McLaren towards the end of the season.

 

[Mephistopheles]

If Honda haven't dissected a Merc engine to learn it's secrets I would be very surprised.

 

[gethinceri]

If they hadn't considered it before entering then tough titty.

 

[Mephistopheles]

And even tougher titty if Jenson isn't sat in front of one of them next year....

 

[Kewee]

I wouldn't be so sure that Honda needs to copy any part of a Mercedes engine. They have the knowledge and technology to be competitive in their own right. They have a very good record in motorsport and have always had a great reputation regarding engine technology.

 

[Mephistopheles]

Apart from when the V10 engine freeze started and they probably had the worst engine on the grid.

 

[Kewee]

McLaren/Honda were dominant in 1988 during the 3.5 Litre turbo era and continued to lead when turbos were banned in 1989.
The Honda V10's were dominant in the McLaren that took Prost to a Championship win and the Honda V12's continued to be dominant in the McLaren for Senna.

 

[Dartman]

Seeing as most manufacturers engines were renamed British prototypes except for I believe Renualt, then possibly it would be a cheaper route to develop the Cosworth unit rather than to follow their floor up route. They may be very good at turbos but F1 is ERS and petrol V6 as opposed to diesel turbo which is where Audi now excel.

 

[Mephistopheles]

A Cosworth V6 hybrid turbo F1 engine - apparently Cosworth just need someone to fund the final development.

I wonder if I could bolt that thing into a bike frame..