teabagyokel nailed it...Technical 2014 Technical Regulations
- Thread starter Brogan
- Start date
teabagyokel nailed it...Ferrari sound like a broken record each year I hear the same thing and there only seems to be 3 lines to the song they sing and they go like this.
- Next years car will be a winner
- We need to improve
- We will catch up
- Next years car will be a winner
For me,if the fuel flow regs are an attempt make F1 technologically relevant, it is a wasted effort. F1 is Entertainment, nothing more. Trying to ascribe a higher purpose to it is like trying to make Miley Cyrus a role model for young members of society.
Last edited:
But F1 has always been at the front of developing car technology since the very begining. Plus the idea of making it a factor again is to make sure the car manufacturers and engine makers invest and stay in the sport. Its already tempted Honda back and god knows F1 needed that.
Entertainment it may be but it won't entertain anyone if there are no cars in it.
It occured to me as I wrote this that this could also be why the main protesters to the new format are a fizzy drinks company and a company that makes its money from building high performance super cars. It isn"t relevent to them and they'd rather not have others come play.
We already know Ferrari would basically like the sport to be Formula Ferrari again. I'm sure it'll only be a couple of months until they have their obligatory yearly media blitz about having a 3 car team.
Entertainment it may be but it won't entertain anyone if there are no cars in it.
It occured to me as I wrote this that this could also be why the main protesters to the new format are a fizzy drinks company and a company that makes its money from building high performance super cars. It isn"t relevent to them and they'd rather not have others come play.
We already know Ferrari would basically like the sport to be Formula Ferrari again. I'm sure it'll only be a couple of months until they have their obligatory yearly media blitz about having a 3 car team.
RasputinLives
5 engines per season, maximum of 15,000 revs, 100 kg/hour maximum fuel rate and a maximum of 100kg of fuel to be used during the race is too many restrictions for me. You could just leave its at 5 engines per season and 100kg of fuel per race and you still have an efficiency formula. In the race the teams will end up running with similar strategies/paces because of the 100kg limit and in qualifying they can't push it too far because of the 5 engine per season limit. You would then be able to have a ridiculously powerful "push to pass button", but this could be used to defend as well as attack.
Also, freezing the engines will very quickly make them old/irrelevant technology again. I know it's all for cost saving blah blah blah but it seems like the only thing the engine manufacturers really get after this year is brand exposure. If the manufacturers are in the sport to develop cutting edge technology then they should be allowed to keep spending, and should be happy to spend, a few million on developing the engines every year. If it's just advertising they shouldn't care what sort of engine is in the car as long as people are watching.
It's all about performance equalisation and I guess it's tricky for the FIA to find the right balance. However, the more restrictions you have the more difficult it is for F1 to really be the pinnacle of motorsport.
5 engines per season, maximum of 15,000 revs, 100 kg/hour maximum fuel rate and a maximum of 100kg of fuel to be used during the race is too many restrictions for me. You could just leave its at 5 engines per season and 100kg of fuel per race and you still have an efficiency formula. In the race the teams will end up running with similar strategies/paces because of the 100kg limit and in qualifying they can't push it too far because of the 5 engine per season limit. You would then be able to have a ridiculously powerful "push to pass button", but this could be used to defend as well as attack.
Also, freezing the engines will very quickly make them old/irrelevant technology again. I know it's all for cost saving blah blah blah but it seems like the only thing the engine manufacturers really get after this year is brand exposure. If the manufacturers are in the sport to develop cutting edge technology then they should be allowed to keep spending, and should be happy to spend, a few million on developing the engines every year. If it's just advertising they shouldn't care what sort of engine is in the car as long as people are watching.
It's all about performance equalisation and I guess it's tricky for the FIA to find the right balance. However, the more restrictions you have the more difficult it is for F1 to really be the pinnacle of motorsport.
sushifiesta I completely agree with you on the engine freeze but still am in favour of regulating the fuel flow.
You are right that the fuel fliw can be ysed to defend too but, as you point out, the engine limiteds mean they are less likely too. As I said before would a team like Sauber risk engines and a good result turning up the fuel flow to defend against the likes of a Vettel or a Hamilton coming through the field? Thry would conclude they were more tban likely to lose the place anyway so why risk the whole result. So we'd end up with less racing and for it to massively easy for people to come through the field.
Also if you take it away Quali becomes a matter if who is willing to risk there engine more and not who is actually quickest.
You are right that the fuel fliw can be ysed to defend too but, as you point out, the engine limiteds mean they are less likely too. As I said before would a team like Sauber risk engines and a good result turning up the fuel flow to defend against the likes of a Vettel or a Hamilton coming through the field? Thry would conclude they were more tban likely to lose the place anyway so why risk the whole result. So we'd end up with less racing and for it to massively easy for people to come through the field.
Also if you take it away Quali becomes a matter if who is willing to risk there engine more and not who is actually quickest.
sobriety
Race Winner
I'd be quite happy for the engines, sorry, power trains, to be unfrozen, but the overall 100kg limit to stay in place, and reduce by 5kg each season. This would drive continuous development to improve power vs efficency, and, in my opinion, would keep F1 relevant while attracting other engine, sorry, power train, manufacturers.
Maybe I'm just stupid, but how does this work?
1. Max fuel usage: 100kg per race
2. Max fuel flow: 100kg per hour
3. Average race duration: 1.5 hours
making, in effect:
4. Max fuel flow to actually finish a race: approx 66.67kg per hour
1. Max fuel usage: 100kg per race
2. Max fuel flow: 100kg per hour
3. Average race duration: 1.5 hours
making, in effect:
4. Max fuel flow to actually finish a race: approx 66.67kg per hour
Il_leone
World Champion
you are never happy if the changes in the regulations changes the pecking order
Come on 2009 when everyone thought KERS was the area to invest in got caught out and it turned out double diffusers was the area to invest in
Again simply the smartest people outsmarting the not so smart
Yes the biggest protesters were Ferrari, Mclaren, Renault and Red Bull at the time to no avail thankfully
I like it when the F1 grid changes around because you might suddenly get a Force India or a Williams winning races which only be good for F1 rather than listening to " Fantastic Seb" at the end of each race
Come on 2009 when everyone thought KERS was the area to invest in got caught out and it turned out double diffusers was the area to invest in
Again simply the smartest people outsmarting the not so smart
Yes the biggest protesters were Ferrari, Mclaren, Renault and Red Bull at the time to no avail thankfully
I like it when the F1 grid changes around because you might suddenly get a Force India or a Williams winning races which only be good for F1 rather than listening to " Fantastic Seb" at the end of each race
Il_leone
World Champion
Red Bull have no grounds to moan anyway - they spend the most money so have the resources and its not like they will end up at the back of the grid and go under
I'd be careful what I say if I was them especially as their engine partners Renault wanted these regulations anyway to help road car production
I'd be careful what I say if I was them especially as their engine partners Renault wanted these regulations anyway to help road car production
Fenderman
Rooters Reporter
... and therein lies the rub. It's all very well for F1 to talk about F1 developing technology relevant to the road car consumer but there is a big "but". Most people will never drive, let alone have, a high performance car let alone a "super-car". Therefore, beyond the efficiency and ECU, fuel management is in the right foot and brain of the driver. Punters won't have mission control to tell 'em when to go into conservation mode or a team manager and FIA to penalise 'em when they don't.
So, the question I have is this: Why neuter the race drivers and diminish the racing with such a tight regulation? Fuel flow sensors aren't exactly new technology and we don't need F1 to develop them. What we do need F1 to do is give us a window on engineers and drivers doing the incredible and being awe inspiring in the process.
So tell 'em how much gas to put in the tank and let 'em use it to the best of their ability.
Oh, and another thing, how F1 will ever regain it's mantle as pinnacle of motor racing without competition between different engines and power unit solutions and fuel technologies is beyond me.
Last edited:
Wombcat
Podium Finisher
That's the average over the race. You can assume that while braking they don't use fuel.
Not all the time they're full on the throttle, so then it's a lower as well. Which means that quite a lot during the race they are far under 66.67 kg/h (I guess about 25% during a lap).
On full throttle they will be on or near to 100 kg/h.
For innovation with relevance to the real world, watch sports car (Le Mans) racing. They have always been far more accepting of new technologies than F1. Everything from disc brakes,to monocoques, to diesel and hybrid power trains appeared in sports car racing first.
By the way, I keep wondering how anyone outside of the teams themselves is privy to any accurate information as to what the team's budgets are. How can anyone claim that so-and-so has the biggest/smallest budget in F1 with any certainty that such a claim is correct, especially since an auto manufacturer such as Mercedes and Ferrari/Fiat have myriad opportunity to hide racing expenditures in other areas of the corporate budgets?
By the way, I keep wondering how anyone outside of the teams themselves is privy to any accurate information as to what the team's budgets are. How can anyone claim that so-and-so has the biggest/smallest budget in F1 with any certainty that such a claim is correct, especially since an auto manufacturer such as Mercedes and Ferrari/Fiat have myriad opportunity to hide racing expenditures in other areas of the corporate budgets?
Agreed Chad Stewarthill The teams (including Redbull) have said that the 100kg/hr and 100kg fuel limit is really not an issue at all, especially when you consider the additional relieving effect of the energy recovery systems. Redbull's protests and recent suggestion by Horny to discard the former constraint is borne out of their dispute about the reliability of the sensors and not the actual fuel restriction itself. This subtlety in the argument tends to be missed quite a lot in the whole furor about the new rules.
Interesting feature on Sky about how Merc have constructed their turbo, spitting the compressor and turbine to help cool the engine and produce more power, lowering the cars weight and improving the centre of gravity in the process. More details here:
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/1...of-their-turbo-engine-has-given-them-the-edge
With an edge like this can any non merc powered team compete? They have been developing this for 3 years, Renault, Ferrari & Honda have some major catching up to do even if they copy this idea directly they can't implement it until next year at the earliest.
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/1...of-their-turbo-engine-has-given-them-the-edge
With an edge like this can any non merc powered team compete? They have been developing this for 3 years, Renault, Ferrari & Honda have some major catching up to do even if they copy this idea directly they can't implement it until next year at the earliest.
Blog Zbod
Podium Finisher
Newey finally has taken off the gloves and is disputing the contention that F1 2014 is any greener. He counters that whoever wrote these rules simpy picked some sparkly bits out of the "this looks rather ace" box and said, "Let's try this chaps, the eco-hippies will love us for it," (my metaphor, not Newey's) without bothering to consult any bona fide engineers about the consequences and implications of their choices.
I had thought that the latter half would be unsalvageable because engine design is frozen until end of season, but Renault already have a new engine for Vettel at Bahrain. I have not yet found details but I presume it was tweaked under the "safety & reliability" loophole. But now Red Bull are back to square one with balancing the ICE -vs- MGU-H -vs- MGU-K.
But Mercedes are believed to have incorporated the function of the MGU-H in a unique fashion, using it to smooth power delivery, effectively making a torque/traction control of it. The advantage of having more power than the competition is compounded by being able to get on the throttle sooner.
Scarbs published that same information in mid-March at Autosport Plus. And Mark Hughes is mental if he thinks splitting the impellers leaves the intake charge cooler enough to put them up 80bhp to Renault and Ferrari. Michael Schmidt at AMuS reckons half the difference (to Red Bull) is in Renault's software problems, and the other half is simply the fact that Renault bollocksed the ICE design.
I had thought that the latter half would be unsalvageable because engine design is frozen until end of season, but Renault already have a new engine for Vettel at Bahrain. I have not yet found details but I presume it was tweaked under the "safety & reliability" loophole. But now Red Bull are back to square one with balancing the ICE -vs- MGU-H -vs- MGU-K.
But Mercedes are believed to have incorporated the function of the MGU-H in a unique fashion, using it to smooth power delivery, effectively making a torque/traction control of it. The advantage of having more power than the competition is compounded by being able to get on the throttle sooner.
Similar threads
- Article
