2013 Engine regs - Good thing, bad thing?

[FB]

The battle to influence the FIA on the proposed changes to the engine regulations for 2013 is starting to hot up. Tony Fernandez has commented that the new engines regs will be a "huge step forward for Formula 1's image" whilst Luca do Montezemello believes there is still time to change the FIA's mind on the 4 cylinder route.

"We're not going to build four-cylinder engines for our road cars. A four-cylinder engine seems a bit weak for the pinnacle of motorsport. Why could not agree on a turbo V6? If there is the slightest possibility of delaying the four-cylinder, I'll try to get it. I sense a possibility and we need to drive to do it. "

A chance for you to voice your opinions. Do you agree with Nick Tony or Luca or is there another way forward for the "pinnacle of motorsport".

Personally, I don't think whether Ferrari plan to put a 4 cylinder engine into one of their cars is of any consequence as to how F1's rules should be framed. I doubt Red Bull plan to put a shaped underbody on their drinks can so is this a reason to argue against this change?

This new engine formula may well draw in other companies and, perhaps, this is what Ferrari are concerned about; after all the BMW 4 cylinder turbo wasn't a bad "little" engine back in the early 80's was it? However, I question whether any form of motor racing should be driven by environmental considerations (unless that is what is specifically set up to do), especially as the fuel used in races is such a trivial amount compared to the carbon footprint of the circus itself.

 

[cider_and_toast]

the BMW 4 cylinder turbo wasn't a bad "little" engine back in the early 80's was it?

Yes but the only other 4 Cylinder turbo engines were the Zakspeed and Hart units and they could't exactly be described as wonderful.

I can understand Ferrari's point of view about cross application of technology but is it more the fact that they've got experience in building V6 turbo's that will benefit their F1 operation and not the other way around that they are now concerned.

What I dislike is that once again, the F1 powers that be are shackling teams to one design and cutting off another avenue of creative freedom that the sport used to thrive on. Why not allow 4, 6 or 8 cylinder engines? To ensure the "green" aspect is maintained then some sort of fuel equation could be worked out for each engine to force the engines with larger capacities to carry less fuel and therefore force them to be greener than the smaller capacity counterparts.

 

[Galahad]

Ferrari will build whatever they have to build, that's clear. Back in 1996 they didn't have any V10 engines in their road cars, yet off their own bat they decided to switch from a V12 to V10 F1 engine.

But the four-cylinder turbo is certainly something that will interest other manufacturers, since that now seems to be the consensus for the small- and family-sized automobile of the near future. On the basis that F1 needs a certain number of engine manufacturers, ideally probably one or two more than it has at present, I think the inline four is a good move.

Giving them the choice of what to build would be wonderful, but that isn't the world we live in any more, sadly. Research and development of a multitude of possible combinations will defeat the object of making things more attractive for investors. Allied to which, they'll be spending like crazy by then on Next-Generation KERS as it is.

 

[snowy]

The FIA should have considered what would actually be a green, sustainable and sensible option for motor vehicles. Hydrogen is by far the most sensible way forward and yet it is being deliberately neglected by just about everybody on the planet. I wonder why?

 

[Brogan]

Surely the "greenest" race you can have involves a pair of trainers.

The whole idea of green motorsport is an oxymoron.

 

[sportsman]

I think its a great idea.Everyone seems to concetrating on the engines alone.New chassis regulations and changes to KERS power allowed will make for very exciting racing.Next season with the changes to minimum weight being raised to 640kg and the cars balance regulated by the FIA will clearly show just effective KERS can be.Any team not running KERS will be at a serious disadvantage.
Bring on 2013.

Mark Gallagher had this to say in a recent Q&A with F1 Fanatic.

"And, contrary to some of the fans’ postings on the internet which were interesting to read following the announcement, this isn’t about the dumbing down of Formula 1, this is extraordinarily exciting, it’s amazingly exciting.

Formula 1 has been lagging behind the car industry in terms of innovation. Running around with 2.4-litre V8 engines which suck up quite a lot of fuel doesn’t really say much about innovation.

I was reading one post on the internet from a fan saying “we need V12s engines with lots of noise and lots of power”. We can all go back and build Cosworth DFVs and Lotus 49s and go racing as in days gone by. But we’re in the 21st century. Formula 1 provides spectacular entertainment and part of that has always been spectacularly innovation and technology.To produce 600bhp from a 1.6-litre engine, turbocharge it, have energy recovery systems, to have a huge electric motor, to show the world that the hybridisation of cars is an exciting thing and you can still get amazing performance – lap times are not going to change – is very exciting."

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/12/31/c ... y-in-2013/

 

[Brogan]

I'm not bothered how much Mark Gallagher gushes over it.

4 cylinder, 1.6 litre engines do not fill me with excitement and never will.

 

[Speshal]

Hydrogen is by far the most sensible way forward and yet it is being deliberately neglected by just about everybody on the planet. I wonder why?

It takes more energy to "make" the hydrogen than it produces, ergo it's carbon positive.

Steam engines fuelled from sustainable forests. That's the future.

 

[FB]

As exciting as steam powered F1 might be I don't think the top speeds woudl get our pulses racing...

Jay Leno: I have the record for the oldest vehicle to be done for speeding. It was a 1912 Stanley Steamer, and I had it cranked up to 75mph on a freeway.

I'm kind of proud of that, especially considering the engine is steam-powered and makes less than 10 bhp. The cop who issued the citation was remarkably straight-faced and unimpressed with my feat, which I thought was a little unimaginative of him. How could you seriously issue a speeding ticket to something with the same engine as a small steam locomotive?

 

[FB]

Bernie & Niki Lauda share your concerns Bro although mainly about the noise the engines will make.

http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/37455.html

 

[sobriety]

Is there going to be a rev limit? I remember reading something about 14k rpms, but can't find anything to back it up online. If it's true then that'll be rubbish.

 

[FB]

According to F1.com the rev limit will 12,000 rpm.

http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/ ... 11597.html

 

[sobriety]

12k?? Might as well run them on diesel. They should let them rev as high as they like and just restrict the fuel available, but oohhhh nooo, that's far to simple

 

[FB]

Found this on the web. There's a man in Australia rebuilding a Benetton BMW and he's published the dyno sheets:

This was generating just over 800bhp and 9,500 RPM although it doesn't say what the boost pressure was. I don't recall the turbo cars of the early 80's sounding too silly, yes there was a whistle from the turbo but (as I've mentioned before) popping waste gates and firey balls of unburnt fuel blowing out of the exhaust were pretty cool to listen to and watch.

As these cars won't have any silencing systems I think they will still sound pretty "throaty". Maybe we need to arrange a trip to an historic F1 event to listen to the sounds of a DFV versus and 80's turbo car.

http://historicformulaone.com/

 

[LifeW12]

The V8's suck, their low torque making overtaking even more difficult in the V10 days .

They need to have an engine that not only is more "green" and has better low speed torque, but also sounds good. I would go for a V6 Turbo with a limit of about 14,000 and ethanol based fuel . Then limit the fuel tank to 130 litres, which means the drivers have to make fuel stops but none of this short fuelling crap that (thankfully) ended 2 years ago because the engines will use more fuel and full tanks are the only option.

They also need a "push to pass" exactly the same as the IRL: 15 pushes for 20 secs each, 10 second time between pushes. The horsepower boost needs to be about 75-100 for this to be effective. They could vary the number of pushes and the boost at various circuits.

Also there should be only 2 fuel settings: full rich and SC rich, which can only be used during the SC period.

Something else that isn't related to the engines that should be trialled: rolling starts and double file restarts

 

[RickD]

F1 Cars shouldn't whine, they should growl..

Can't see this being much fun to listen to, may as well run diesels, at least there will be more torque for overtaking that way..

 

[Grizzly]

None of you guys into the tuning and racing/drag racing etc? A 700hp 4 banger on 4 bar boost with a 50mm open waste-gate popping at 12krpm is ear splitting and utterly addictive. OK, the V6 does sound even better when doing the same thing and i do agree that an L4 is a little understated for the biggest race series in the world, but it is more than capable of making the power, so really, there is no real justification for using a V6, sadly.

There may be a tiny reduction in noise, simply because all the exhaust at some point goes through a 'tiny' (loosest sense of the word) little exhaust scroll, but actually i think the v8s can sound a bit screamy and annoying like a really really loud moped! I don't think anyone here is complaining about the way the WRC cars sound, and we are talking a similar setup, with less silencing, and more than twice the output!

The 4s will have a raw, much more thumpy, detached and broken sound that climaxes as boost exceeds regulation and before the engine simply explodes, a huge 50mm 'hole' opens up in the exhaust to release 50psi+ of pent up, 1500deg plus exhaust gas burning as it escapes and filling the air with high pressure resonance pounding your chest as they grab the next gear and the anti lag lets loose fuel into the spinning (at 100 000rpm+) turbo with a CRACK and a flame ball and it all starts over.

No more bashing the 4 banger please.

 

[sportsman]

None of you guys into the tuning and racing/drag racing etc? A 700hp 4 banger on 4 bar boost with a 50mm open waste-gate popping at 12krpm is ear splitting and utterly addictive. OK, the V6 does sound even better when doing the same thing and i do agree that an L4 is a little understated for the biggest race series in the world, but it is more than capable of making the power, so really, there is no real justification for using a V6, sadly.

There may be a tiny reduction in noise, simply because all the exhaust at some point goes through a 'tiny' (loosest sense of the word) little exhaust scroll, but actually i think the v8s can sound a bit screamy and annoying like a really really loud moped! I don't think anyone here is complaining about the way the WRC cars sound, and we are talking a similar setup, with less silencing, and more than twice the output!

The 4s will have a raw, much more thumpy, detached and broken sound that climaxes as boost exceeds regulation and before the engine simply explodes, a huge 50mm 'hole' opens up in the exhaust to release 50psi+ of pent up, 1500deg plus exhaust gas burning as it escapes and filling the air with high pressure resonance pounding your chest as they grab the next gear and the anti lag lets loose fuel into the spinning (at 100 000rpm+) turbo with a CRACK and a flame ball and it all starts over.

No more bashing the 4 banger please.

What he said, plus 1

 

[Brogan]

I don't think anyone here is complaining about the way the WRC cars sound, and we are talking a similar setup, with less silencing, and more than twice the output!

As you've explicitly mentioned it, I for one would absolutely hate F1 to sound like that.
If this is all about being more akin to road cars, when was the last time you saw and heard a road car behaving like that?

I would take a V6 or V8 (even a V12) any day over a 4 cylinder engine.

 

[RickD]

As you've explicitly mentioned it, I for one would absolutely hate F1 to sound like that.
If this is all about being more akin to road cars, when was the last time you saw and heard a road car behaving like that?

I would take a V6 or V8 (even a V12) any day over a 4 cylinder engine.

What he said, plus 1.