Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
mrluke wrote:Even if the V6s were a bit slower in the corners they are nearly 30kmh a faster on the straight, how would the v8 ever overtake?
The lighter car would get to corner 7% faster if it was down purely to aero. In a 200km/h corner that's a 14km/h advantage. Let's say in reality it is 10km/h. The lighter car still gets to brake later and start accelerating earlier, so we are back at ~14km/h difference at the beginning of the straight. It would take the more powerful car (much of that power is wasted accelerating the 14.5% extra weight) much of the straight to recover those 14km/h in the first place by which time, in many cases, the straight would be over. I say the V8 can pass in the first medium speed corner sequence, red bull style, and drive into the distance.
Even if the v8 came out of the corner 14kph faster (debatable), 14kph at 80kph is not the same as 330kph vs 345kph.
How many times did we see the v8s bouncing off the rev limiter? Now add the effect of not being able to tweak the gear ratios for every single track and they are going to be sitting ducks on every straight. Add in some DRS and the picture gets even worse.
However, the straights are just a small part of the overall track. Sure, they might be sitting ducks on a straight, but how many of such straights are there? one or two mostly.
That would be clawed more than back under braking, acceleration and cornering. also the lighter car would have a tactical advantage as less force on the tires would mean less wear.
If they both were fuel limited V6T will win, since they´re more efficient. Very simple
Now if you want to put some handicap to V6T so V8 have some chance ok, but if they´re 90kg heavier because of a different ERS/KERS then that´s the difference, not the engine
So the discussion should be: What´s faster, with or without ERS? I don´t think 90kg difference will be compensated by any ERS, no matter how efficient it is. Weight does affect everything, cornering speed, braking distance, acceleration, top speed, tire management....
senja wrote:What about aerodynamics?
2013 car has better times, but with coanda exhaust, beam wing, higher nose, and more fuel.
I think with 100 kg of fuel V6 clearly wins.
We're not talking about 2013 car vs 2015 car. We're talking about who would win a race with the current rules, except with the possibility of switching out your PU for a NA V8, but keeping the 100kg fuel flow limit.
For me, it's kinda clear - the V6 will win. The V6s are able to complete races within a minute or so of what the V8s were capable of, even when the V8s had higher fuel flow *and* better aero. Take away the better aero alone and I suspect the V6s would be faster over a race distance (heck, this is already true at certain circuits which don't have significant aero components). Take away the extra fuel, and I expect the V8 would be much much much slower.
That's exactly my point. V8 engine in 2015 car would be much slower than in 2013 car.
mrluke wrote:Wait the v8 gets 4wd and a 90kg weight advantage? What more do you need to do to skew it in the V8s favour?
All being equal the turbo car will be quicker, thats why they were banned.
Even if the V6s were a bit slower in the corners they are nearly 30kmh a faster on the straight, how would the v8 ever overtake?
Turbo's on higher boost will be more fuel hungry than the V8's... The engine was downsized by 33% and even WITH higher capacity KERS and TERS the fuel efficiency has improved by only just that amount. 1.6/2.4~=100kg/160kg...
If you remove the KER abilities that means that turbocharged downsized engines under race conditions do not see much more difference than the V8 due to their additional weight. And If you turn up the boost on the turbos even more to make up that lap time deficit the fuel efficiency will even be worse. The turbo engine's real enemy is its weight. And that is where I think a more hybridized V8 will stand a very good chance. I hope I am making sense... haha
mrluke wrote:Even if the v8 came out of the corner 14kph faster (debatable), 14kph at 80kph is not the same as 330kph vs 345kph.
How many times did we see the v8s bouncing off the rev limiter? Now add the effect of not being able to tweak the gear ratios for every single track and they are going to be sitting ducks on every straight. Add in some DRS and the picture gets even worse.
Ahh. bouncing off the limiter means more power is there to use! That 8th gear would be very handy... I think The regs should allow for gear ratio changes to those using the V8's.
mrluke wrote:Wait the v8 gets 4wd and a 90kg weight advantage? What more do you need to do to skew it in the V8s favour?
All being equal the turbo car will be quicker, thats why they were banned.
Even if the V6s were a bit slower in the corners they are nearly 30kmh a faster on the straight, how would the v8 ever overtake?
Turbo's on higher boost will be more fuel hungry than the V8's... The engine was downsized by 33% and even WITH higher capacity KERS and TERS the fuel efficiency has improved by only just that amount. 1.6/2.4~=100kg/160kg...
why should fuel efficiency be directly related to engine capacity?
mrluke wrote:Even if the v8 came out of the corner 14kph faster (debatable), 14kph at 80kph is not the same as 330kph vs 345kph.
How many times did we see the v8s bouncing off the rev limiter? Now add the effect of not being able to tweak the gear ratios for every single track and they are going to be sitting ducks on every straight. Add in some DRS and the picture gets even worse.
Ahh. bouncing off the limiter means more power is there to use! That 8th gear would be very handy... I think The regs should allow for gear ratio changes to those using the V8's.
Not really, it means that they had to hamstring their top speed to get the acceleration they needed over the rest of the lap to achieve the required lap time. Whereas the V6T has enough power to generate that level of acceleration everywhere while still delivering a top speed well in excess of that achieved by the V8s.
So the V8s now get a 90kg weight advantage, 4wd and an exemption from gearbox regulations. I assume you will also exempt them from 4 PUs per year?
Put the v8 in a 2015 car and it would be slower over a race distance, there's no debate. You know this, that is why you are changing the rules to give the v8 an ever growing advantage.
mrluke wrote:Even if the v8 came out of the corner 14kph faster (debatable), 14kph at 80kph is not the same as 330kph vs 345kph.
How many times did we see the v8s bouncing off the rev limiter? Now add the effect of not being able to tweak the gear ratios for every single track and they are going to be sitting ducks on every straight. Add in some DRS and the picture gets even worse.
Ahh. bouncing off the limiter means more power is there to use! That 8th gear would be very handy... I think The regs should allow for gear ratio changes to those using the V8's.
Not really, it means that they had to hamstring their top speed to get the acceleration they needed over the rest of the lap to achieve the required lap time. Whereas the V6T has enough power to generate that level of acceleration everywhere while still delivering a top speed well in excess of that achieved by the V8s.
So the V8s now get a 90kg weight advantage, 4wd and an exemption from gearbox regulations. I assume you will also exempt them from 4 PUs per year?
Put the v8 in a 2015 car and it would be slower over a race distance, there's no debate. You know this, that is why you are changing the rules to give the v8 an ever growing advantage.
Yes, so add the 8th gear and you won't have to hamstring your top speed.
Well you see, I am not necessary trying to handicap the Turbo engines, it's more to cut costs, improve the show(the sound!) and still send a message of "energy conservation"(yeah right!) all while still being the pinnacle of Motorsport. In the end you are just replacing the Turbo's with front wheel KERS.
Note** The front wheel KERS was suggested as replacement for the TERS, Four wheel drive didn't even come to my mind but that's a good idea!
Well, you can stack the deck in favor of the V8's until they are guaranteed to win. But it doesn't change this: a 2013-spec car won't beat a 2014/2015-spec car over a race distance on 100 kg of fuel.
zeph wrote:Well, you can stack the deck in favor of the V8's until they are guaranteed to win. But it doesn't change this: a 2013-spec car won't beat a 2014/2015-spec car over a race distance on 100 kg of fuel.
I want to see something to substantiate that claim instead of killing the thread off like some demon child.
I haven't got the chance to do any calculations yet... but judging by Toyota TS040, that HYKERS+NA combination is very viable.
An F1 car is not a sportscar. There is no room in front to fit a MGU and axles. Also the weight distribution would change new aero is needed. Let them just increase the power of current engine and see if the show gets better.
in-wheel electric motors @ the front [ & rear if desired ] would definately bring more grip, however, as said, the weight is an issue. i'm sure with 18" rims there would be sufficient space to mount such a device, and if i'm not wrong, this would 'relieve' the brakes significantly as these electric motors are able to essentially impose a controlled 'reverse' to the wheels thus braking the wheels. this, however, costs energy instead of like braking now 'causes' a certain amount of energy regeneration.
there's so much to choose from, but honestly, development really doesn't have to go 'that fast'. Just allow higher power output through increased fuel flow for the turbo engine. Then, the revs can go up too, and sound improves significantly, too.
key point here i assume though is that i believe the fuel flow restrictions are put in order to slowly 'move the sport away' from fuel-consuming engines and start aiming for supposedly cleaner energy sources, in this case, electric power.
if you allow for more development for the classic [albeit turbo] engine, then you simply said take development interest away from the electrical 'world' - exactly where the future - presumably - lies.
It remains to be seen what final decisions will be taken for the 2017 reg changes.
Will there be a chance for engine manufacturers, or will we be seeing MIELE F1 Team?
SAMSUNG F1 RACING TEAM?
"Explain the ending to F1 in football terms"
"Hamilton was beating Verstappen 7-0, then the ref decided F%$& rules, next goal wins
while also sending off 4 Hamilton players to make it more interesting"
That 8th gear would be very handy... I think The regs should allow for gear ratio changes to those using the V8's.