Should F1 allow diesel engines?
- Thread starter FB
- Start date
I've always been averse to diesels so I would say no to them in F1, whereas my brother (also a F1 nut and who goes to the British GP with me regularly) has always loved them and would probably say yes.
My own (layman's) view is that modern petrol engines can be clean, efficient and fast, so why bother with diesels. When it comes to road cars at least, I find it interesting as an Alfa lover to compare the 150TBi petrol Turbo engine with the 3.2 V6 normally aspirated and their highest performance diesel engine, the 2.4 JTDM. All figures based on the 159. Out of interest I have chucked in the petrol and diesel versions of the Jag XF for further comparison:
Model bhp torque mpg mph 0-60 C02
Alfa 159
3.2 V6 260 238 24.8 152 7.0 270
1750 TBi 200 236 34.9 147 7.7 189
2.4JTDM 200 295 41.5 143 8.4 179
Jaguar XF
3.0 V6 238 216 26.8 148 7.9 249
2.7 V6 D 207 320 37.6 143 7.7 199
(Sorry, my table formatting doesn't seem to have worked very well)
Not a scientific study I know, and there is the proviso that I am comparing diesel engined road cars with petrol engined ones that have a catalytic convertor. I have no idea whether a CAT would be feasible or desirable in a high performance racing car.
But anyway, it's interesting to note that the TBi has almost equal performance but much better economy and emissions than the much larger N/A engine and significantly better performance with only marginally worse emissions than the diesel. Both diesels are down on speed and acceleration but are good on economy and torque, so would be good for towing horse boxes or caravans.
I do feel that the 'greening' of F1 is a bit like following the mantra of the day. I'm all for efficiency and preserving our dwindling fossil fuel resources, but I remain sceptical on the issue of climate change and whether we really can significantly affect it. Even if we could, the amount of energy used by F1 cars while racing is roughly the equivalent of 22 cars going at full pelt from London to Birmingham and back on 20 days of the year. Compared to the billions of vehicles worldwide that on a daily basis belch out pollutants and do damage to our roads and buildings, it's a bit like a handful of sand in the Sahara desert.
My own (layman's) view is that modern petrol engines can be clean, efficient and fast, so why bother with diesels. When it comes to road cars at least, I find it interesting as an Alfa lover to compare the 150TBi petrol Turbo engine with the 3.2 V6 normally aspirated and their highest performance diesel engine, the 2.4 JTDM. All figures based on the 159. Out of interest I have chucked in the petrol and diesel versions of the Jag XF for further comparison:
Model bhp torque mpg mph 0-60 C02
Alfa 159
3.2 V6 260 238 24.8 152 7.0 270
1750 TBi 200 236 34.9 147 7.7 189
2.4JTDM 200 295 41.5 143 8.4 179
Jaguar XF
3.0 V6 238 216 26.8 148 7.9 249
2.7 V6 D 207 320 37.6 143 7.7 199
(Sorry, my table formatting doesn't seem to have worked very well)
Not a scientific study I know, and there is the proviso that I am comparing diesel engined road cars with petrol engined ones that have a catalytic convertor. I have no idea whether a CAT would be feasible or desirable in a high performance racing car.
But anyway, it's interesting to note that the TBi has almost equal performance but much better economy and emissions than the much larger N/A engine and significantly better performance with only marginally worse emissions than the diesel. Both diesels are down on speed and acceleration but are good on economy and torque, so would be good for towing horse boxes or caravans.
I do feel that the 'greening' of F1 is a bit like following the mantra of the day. I'm all for efficiency and preserving our dwindling fossil fuel resources, but I remain sceptical on the issue of climate change and whether we really can significantly affect it. Even if we could, the amount of energy used by F1 cars while racing is roughly the equivalent of 22 cars going at full pelt from London to Birmingham and back on 20 days of the year. Compared to the billions of vehicles worldwide that on a daily basis belch out pollutants and do damage to our roads and buildings, it's a bit like a handful of sand in the Sahara desert.
The question for me is whether the teams should be allowed to choose rather than the FIA being prescriptive. I like the idea of a fuel limit, maybe for the race or a whole weekend even. I don't believe ot would be "green wash" rather giving teams the options to experiment and see who's got the best engineers, after all everyone laughed at Renault in 1977 and they were proven right. Without F1's turbo race would trubo cars have evolved as quickly as they have on the road?
I also think the noise thing is a bit of a distraction, as has been mentioned in other threads the turbo cars of the 80's had a noise and beauty all of their open as waste gates popped and balls of unburnt fuel belched out of the exhaust.
I also think the noise thing is a bit of a distraction, as has been mentioned in other threads the turbo cars of the 80's had a noise and beauty all of their open as waste gates popped and balls of unburnt fuel belched out of the exhaust.
I think Chadders has nailed it really.You are either a fan of diesels or your not.I drive a diesel car and have done for the past ten years or so.I would never consider a petrol again.
I was resposible for buying our fleet of ten company cars and as they came up for replacement I replaced them all with diesels.That included the "prestige" BMW 740's in the face of stiff opposition from the other directors who after a very short time were absolutely in favour of them.
I also agree with the idea of relaxation of the engine regulations and a set fuel allowance for the entire weekend.
2 litre engines, any configuration and set fuel amount reducing by ten percent year on year to an agreed level.
Unlimited kinetic energy recovery systems and no restrictions on use at any time.
I was resposible for buying our fleet of ten company cars and as they came up for replacement I replaced them all with diesels.That included the "prestige" BMW 740's in the face of stiff opposition from the other directors who after a very short time were absolutely in favour of them.
I also agree with the idea of relaxation of the engine regulations and a set fuel allowance for the entire weekend.
2 litre engines, any configuration and set fuel amount reducing by ten percent year on year to an agreed level.
Unlimited kinetic energy recovery systems and no restrictions on use at any time.
As FB and Sportsman I would be all for allowing the teams to choose, and making the engine regs less prescriptive. You can't argue with the success of the diesel Le Mans cars, or even the BTCC Seats (are they still running diesel engines this season?), so although I may not like diesels myself, I can see the day when they might make their way into F1.
When it comes to the noise I agree with FB that it is a bit of a red herring. There have been numerous variations in the sound of an F1 engine down the years and just because we are currently used to the 'banshee' wail of the high-revving V8's doesn't mean that we can't move on and learn to love something else. In fact, when I go to a GP I find the current engines actually quite painful on the ear, and look forward to a change.
Edit:
Duh! Woefully out of date and thick regarding the BTCC. No works diesel Seats any more (although they are still competing in WTCC), should have realised that; only one privateer Seat BTCC entry this year and I don't think that's a diesel.
When it comes to the noise I agree with FB that it is a bit of a red herring. There have been numerous variations in the sound of an F1 engine down the years and just because we are currently used to the 'banshee' wail of the high-revving V8's doesn't mean that we can't move on and learn to love something else. In fact, when I go to a GP I find the current engines actually quite painful on the ear, and look forward to a change.
Edit:
Duh! Woefully out of date and thick regarding the BTCC. No works diesel Seats any more (although they are still competing in WTCC), should have realised that; only one privateer Seat BTCC entry this year and I don't think that's a diesel.
Diesel in F1 would be sacrilege. Really it would. These are sprint cars, endurance racing is an entirely different kettle of fish.
Whether it is feasible though, well basically the diesels would probably win, hands down. Unless some very very careful restrictions were placed on them. They would use less volume of fuel per xyz, and without restriction, would be compound turbo'd and make insane amounts of power and torque. It would be the equivalent of the 80s turbo's vs NAs, meaning if you wanted to be even remotely competitive, you couldn't be using an NA engine.
Unlike petrol forced induction engines that begin to pre-detonate at 1 bar boost, and with ever increasing octane rating, retarding the ignition, and adding massive amounts of (wasted) quench fuel can max out at around 4-5 bars. Diesel engines are compression ignition, which means they cannot pre-detonate, and you can boost away to your hearts content, 8, 9, 10 bars of boost with compound turbos is exceptionally simple to achieve and work with, meaning that within the time it takes for the teams to adapt, Petrol would be gone from F1.
Far more relevant IMO would be bio-ethanol and other bio-mass based fuels that operate on spark ignition systems, by makeup enjoy much higher octane ratings, produce less noxious gasses and do not rely on fossil fuel deposits.
Whether it is feasible though, well basically the diesels would probably win, hands down. Unless some very very careful restrictions were placed on them. They would use less volume of fuel per xyz, and without restriction, would be compound turbo'd and make insane amounts of power and torque. It would be the equivalent of the 80s turbo's vs NAs, meaning if you wanted to be even remotely competitive, you couldn't be using an NA engine.
Unlike petrol forced induction engines that begin to pre-detonate at 1 bar boost, and with ever increasing octane rating, retarding the ignition, and adding massive amounts of (wasted) quench fuel can max out at around 4-5 bars. Diesel engines are compression ignition, which means they cannot pre-detonate, and you can boost away to your hearts content, 8, 9, 10 bars of boost with compound turbos is exceptionally simple to achieve and work with, meaning that within the time it takes for the teams to adapt, Petrol would be gone from F1.
Far more relevant IMO would be bio-ethanol and other bio-mass based fuels that operate on spark ignition systems, by makeup enjoy much higher octane ratings, produce less noxious gasses and do not rely on fossil fuel deposits.
RickD
Pole Sitter
HAHAHAHAHA.. Sorry, shouldn't laugh, just couldn't quite hold it in..
Its not like you are that far from a garage..
Andyoak
Champion Elect
I would like to see a freeing up of the engine regulations and am generally in favour of the only restriction being an allocated fuel allowance (kg) for race day. i'm not too bothered as to what the fuel should be; ultimately the teams will all gravitate to the one most suited to racing and could be none of the ones mentioned above. It could well be that this unknown fuel may well be suitable for common use or only good for racing.
To me it would mean a return to engineering solutions (if it can be combined with reduced reliance on 'wings') which, to me, is where F1 should be. I'm also more than happy to see deregulated KERS or other supplemental power systems. Although in wanting to see less reliance on wings we could lose DRS quite happily.
To me it would mean a return to engineering solutions (if it can be combined with reduced reliance on 'wings') which, to me, is where F1 should be. I'm also more than happy to see deregulated KERS or other supplemental power systems. Although in wanting to see less reliance on wings we could lose DRS quite happily.
Andyoak
Champion Elect
It's not a GM based lump is it?
Had to replace the spill pipes on my SAAB because they were letting in air. GM don't fit a priming bladder which will usually solve that problem so instead it was a call to the RAC with a flat battery and then I almost burnt out the starter motor trying to get the bugger to fire.
I'm not sure I agree that the fuel allowed should be too open. The turbo cars in the 80's had incredibly dangerous and toxic fule mixes which eventually had to be banned as mechanics were having to wear NBC suits (I exaggerate but you get my drift) just to fill the tanks. I think anything they use has to have some relevance to road cars - Petrol, diesel, bio fuels, hydrogen even - perhaps F1 could be used as a test bed for new fuels which would be relevant to road cars?
Actually that's not as off-topic as you might think, given that the teams regularly run out of fuel deliberately during testing, to find the absolute limits of the fuel tank system. Presumably they would have to stop that practice if running diesel engines.
Andyoak
Champion Elect
I do remember that time and it was a big driver to using pump fuels only. Is there a single supplier of fuel to F1?
Maybe a fuel war would be good...
... we could put say a limit of untaxed petrol cost / kg + 10% to encourage development of more energy efficient (probably the wrong term) fuel mixes but still within the realms of practical application in the real world. That per kilo cost could then be applied to any fuel that can be used in an internal combust engine. As fuel allowances shrink there will be more and more presuure to engineer and develop lost energy collection (KERS or similar) that can be applied through the race.
HAHAHAHAHA.. Sorry, shouldn't laugh, just couldn't quite hold it in..
Garage? where we are we are going we don't need no garages, managed to knock it into neutral just before the garden centre and coast into my driveway
Andrea_Moda_Rules
Podium Finisher
well a lot of this discussion has gone over my head and im not too great with engines, but personally i think this 'non-devlopment' of engines is nuts. Anything that is relativly cheap to devlop and use in f1 should be recommended. Also going further, why not bio-fuels too. I hear there is now a '2nd Grade' boi fuel that is more green and doen't not use crops to make only waste material.
also, i have always wondered why with all the 'exotic' material used in making F1 fuel to gain performance advances weather it would be cheaper for teams/engine suppilers if Formula 1 used a standered fuel supplier. Alomst a control fuel, like control tyres like Formlua 1 has atm.
Ive always felt that this should be looked into.
also, i have always wondered why with all the 'exotic' material used in making F1 fuel to gain performance advances weather it would be cheaper for teams/engine suppilers if Formula 1 used a standered fuel supplier. Alomst a control fuel, like control tyres like Formlua 1 has atm.
Ive always felt that this should be looked into.
The posts related to turbo engines have been merged with this thread: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/f1-turbo-engines-for-2013.1334/
