Formula E

Please discuss here all your remarks and pose your questions about all racing series, except Formula One. Both technical and other questions about GP2, Touring cars, IRL, LMS, ...
Jolle
66
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Formula E

Post by Jolle » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:33 am

Andres125sx wrote:
mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:To me flat wings have sense on gp3 cars so they look similar to f1 and settings are similar zo young drivers get used to that format, but I think FE should be different, so I dont see any reason to make similar cars.

AM-RB001 is a new concept I'd have loved to see in FE. Ignore F1 rulebook wich is the responsible for F1 cars to look the way they do, and build a car with current aero knolege from scratch. Actally even AM-RB001 is conditioned by street cars rules, so for FE they could have been even more innovative

Shame they didnt...
Seriously? ...
Such are junk is the last thing you should want. That's what's ruined F1. (Apart from corruption)
It's morbidly expensive designing such twisted/convoluted shaped cars and it's also useless, with no real world connection. The cars become expensive, ugly aero toys. Even worse, it results in the oppression of relevant technologies, with real life significance. (Another reason why a pretty straight forward wing-car aero formula would be nice)
Are you seriously saying innovation ruined F1? #-o
Yes! Back to steel cars and leather helmets!

But yes, seriously. First of all, F1 ruined? The numbers suggest otherwise and for the first time ever, the PU has relevance to road use (not just cars but think bigger, busses and trucks) and the first mass produced carbon fibre car are coming!

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:08 pm

Andres125sx wrote:obviously, but you were talking about effiency and endurance...
So? It'd improves efficiency and endurance whichever distances you'd like to travel. Seriously... You're arguing with yourself, about nothing.
Andres125sx wrote:It exists is not the same to it works. Can you point me to some applicaton where they are used with similar discharge rates combined with fast charging (harvesting)?.

Have you ever noticed FE batteries are standarized? Standarized components must be reliable and consistent. LiS batteries are not yet.
Yes it is. If they have usable prototype cell, how in earth would it mean anything else?
They have similar charge/discharge characteristics. (You can look it up yourself if you want to) They're meant to replace Li-ion.
Anyways, you can compensate by increasing the number of cells.

Standardization of batteries doesn't make much sense. But they could just as easily standardize LiS cells.
" Standarized components must be reliable and consistent." Umm nope, not necessarily. Not that it's a factor in any way. If they make cells with the same process they'll have identical carateristics. (Including the deviation in parameters)
Last edited by mzso on Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:26 pm

Andres125sx wrote: Well, imagine those Pikes Peak cars withot wings
[quote/]
ugly
Well, then you are superficial and only care about the looks.
Andres125sx wrote:Are you seriously saying innovation ruined F1? #-o
That bullsh*t is what you said. (Trying feebly to put it in my mouth)
Aerodynamic downforce was innovation in the early seventies at the latest. Now it's just a very worthless and damaging money pit. Why on earth do you really think these useless twisted aero toys are in any way innovative? I also ruined the economy of F1. It's now ruled by monopolies and sometimes duopolies of very rich teams, why the others mostly go bankrupt, or drive behind the back of the field.
They're just using air to push down the car with ever more expensive and convoluted shapes, largely because the ineffective regulations that limit aerodynamic downforce.
F1 would evenb be better off with uniform chassis, with leaving everything else (almost) completely open for innovation.
Jolle wrote:Yes! Back to steel cars and leather helmets!

But yes, seriously. First of all, F1 ruined? The numbers suggest otherwise and for the first time ever, the PU has relevance to road use (not just cars but think bigger, busses and trucks) and the first mass produced carbon fibre car are coming!
Yes it is. Have you seen races in the past decade or two? (How about the ninteties when it was still mostly good?)

I'm quite sure the viewership is constantly dropping. I don't know about income, but that won't lag behind for long.
Plus the people complaining about how sh*t the races are are increasing. (That's because they are sh*t)
I think F1 is already going on on inertia and sentimentalism only. Certainly not because of exciting races, which are few and far between.

I'm not on the same opinin about relevance. Turbos are the thing of the eighties. Hybrid engines were innovated in road cars, F1 is late to the game. So it mostly took technology from road cars rather than adding. Plus the electric part is way too much limited to result in any sort of innovation.
Also the whole is out of touch with real life trends which is heading towards full electric vehicles. The electric part in F1 is hardly more than a marketing feature. (Though admittedly way more then KERS was which was a joke)

Jolle
66
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2014 9:58 pm
Location: Dordrecht

Re: Formula E

Post by Jolle » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:33 pm

mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote: Well, imagine those Pikes Peak cars withot wings
[quote/]
ugly
Well, then you are superficial and only care about the looks.
Andres125sx wrote:Are you seriously saying innovation ruined F1? #-o
That bullsh*t is what you said. (Trying feebly to put it in my mouth)
Aerodynamic downforce was innovation in the early seventies at the latest. Now it's just a very worthless and damaging money pit. Why on earth do you really think these useless twisted aero toys are in any way innovative? I also ruined the economy of F1. It's now ruled by monopolies and sometimes duopolies of very rich teams, why the others mostly go bankrupt, or drive behind the back of the field.
They're just using air to push down the car with ever more expensive and convoluted shapes, largely because the ineffective regulations that limit aerodynamic downforce.
F1 would evenb be better off with uniform chassis, with leaving everything else (almost) completely open for innovation.
Jolle wrote:Yes! Back to steel cars and leather helmets!

But yes, seriously. First of all, F1 ruined? The numbers suggest otherwise and for the first time ever, the PU has relevance to road use (not just cars but think bigger, busses and trucks) and the first mass produced carbon fibre car are coming!
Yes it is. Have you seen races in the past decade or two? (How about the ninteties when it was still mostly good?)

I'm quite sure the viewership is constantly dropping. I don't know about income, but that won't lag behind for long.
Plus the people complaining about how sh*t the races are are increasing. (That's because they are sh*t)
I think F1 is already going on on inertia and sentimentalism only.

I'm not on the same opinin about relevance. Turbos are the thing of the eighties. Hybrid engines were innovated in road cars, F1 is late to the game. So it mostly took technology from road cars rather than adding. Plus the electric part is way too much limited to result in any sort of innovation.
Also the whole is out of touch with real life trends which is heading towards full electric vehicles. The electric part in F1 is hardly more than a marketing feature. (Though admittedly way more then KERS was which was a joke)
I think they miss you at the NASCAR forum.

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:49 pm

Jolle wrote:I think they miss you at the NASCAR forum.
I doubt it, Nascar is junk by default.

Andres125sx
253
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Wed Jul 27, 2016 7:42 pm

mzso wrote:It also seems the everyone only cares about liking a look. With no consideration to other factors. (In the case I suggested: better efficiency/range (and such less weight), safety, less disruption to the race, better reliability/durability)
Andres125sx wrote:But you're comparing apples to oranges, as pikes peak cars only need endurance for some minutes. That way it's easier to make a lighter and more efficient car
mzso wrote:The body design is not relevant to this.
Andres125sx wrote:obviously, but you were talking about effiency and endurance...
mzso wrote:So? It'd improves efficiency and endurance whichever distances you'd like to travel. Seriously... You're arguing with yourself, about nothing.
Ok let´s try again. What makes you think Pikes Peak cars are more efficient tan FE cars even if you increase battery capacity and weight as you suggested?

Andres125sx
253
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Wed Jul 27, 2016 7:48 pm

mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote: Well, imagine those Pikes Peak cars withot wings
[quote/]
ugly
Well, then you are superficial and only care about the looks.
No, I only did what you ask me to do, imagine Pikes Peak cars without wings. Those would be ugly and I don´t see any benefit technically wise compared to FE cars

So the question remains, what makes you think Pikes Peak cars are so good compared to FE cars to suggest even with a much heavier battery they still would be a better choice?

Andres125sx
253
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:18 pm

mzso wrote:Aerodynamic downforce was innovation in the early seventies at the latest. Now it's just a very worthless and damaging money pit. Why on earth do you really think these useless twisted aero toys are in any way innovative
So you think downforce is worthless and useless. Then I can only disagree, as to me racing is about going around a track as fast as possible, and for that DF is a BIG factor. Without aerodynamics no series will be ever faster than GP2. With aerodynamics, when battery technology allow it, they will have the potential to be faster than F1, and if FE really want to be the future of motor racing, to me aerodynamics are a must

That´s the reason I put AM-RB001 as an example. DF is not innovative, agree, but the way you get it can be. In past decades wings have been the main DF generator mainly because F1 rules banned any other system to get DF (fan cars, true venturi tunnels...), but wings also cause a lot of drag and dirty air.

Aerodynamics have evolved enough to generate DF without wings, and since FE cars don´t need too much DF because of their limited power (due to battery technology being the limiting factor), I´d have loved if FE rules would have taken a different route, instead of going to the usual wing cars, specially when those wings are so flat (to avoid too much drag wich would drain the batteries too fast) they´re almost useless, and as GP3, they´re mainly used to balance the car.

But with a more modern design, or with more efficient aerodynamics, they could get higher DF levels with same drag, so cars would be faster and they could develop a new concept while battery technology catch up. Then, when battery technology allow 1000bhp car for a reasonable race distance, they will be faster than F1 cars. Actually with e-power (much higher torque, no big and heavy engine block so weight distribution would be better, etc.) and more efficient aerodynamics (less drag for same DF), they would break F1 laptime records way before power reach similar numbers

That´s what I´d love to see

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Thu Jul 28, 2016 10:48 am

Andres125sx wrote:Those would be ugly and I don´t see any benefit technically wise compared to FE cars
Then you have trouble with comprehension, because that's what I was on about for a while...
Andres125sx wrote:Ok let´s try again. What makes you think Pikes Peak cars are more efficient tan FE cars even if you increase battery capacity and weight as you suggested?
Andres125sx wrote:So the question remains, what makes you think Pikes Peak cars are so good compared to FE cars to suggest even with a much heavier battery they still would be a better choice?
I didn't Pikes Peak cars are more efficient. I said that covering up wheels (a big friggin cylinder is not aerodynamic) with a wing-car formula (lack of wings = less drag) would be more efficient. I brought up those car as a rough visual example. Also I mentioned safety too.

A heavier battery pack is needed for greater power, that's not a choice. More power is needed to be more interesting and so to attract more people.

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:07 am

Andres125sx wrote:So you think downforce is worthless and useless. Then I can only disagree, as to me racing is about going around a track as fast as possible, and for that DF is a BIG factor. Without aerodynamics no series will be ever faster than GP2. With aerodynamics, when battery technology allow it, they will have the potential to be faster than F1, and if FE really want to be the future of motor racing, to me aerodynamics are a must
Aren't you tired of strawmanning? Everything you start with "so you're saying..." is bullsh*t that you conjured up.

Racing is not about going around the track as fast as possible, whatever you may believe. It's about competition. Otherwise they wouldn't limit anything and we would have ridiculously fast cars and "racing" not worth watching. (Well, F1 achieved this with incompetent overregulation too...)

It's worthless to allow aeronautics to dominate racecar design, because it wastes a lot of money for no gain. And only rich teams will have any chance. I said this already, but you failed to comprehend...

They're better off using uniform aerdynamic elements, with focusing design on meaningful stuff.
Andres125sx wrote:That´s the reason I put AM-RB001 as an example. DF is not innovative, agree, but the way you get it can be. In past decades wings have been the main DF generator mainly because F1 rules banned any other system to get DF (fan cars, true venturi tunnels...), but wings also cause a lot of drag and dirty air.
Not really. It's the same thing. With no useful real life applications.
Andres125sx wrote: But with a more modern design, or with more efficient aerodynamics, they could get higher DF levels with same drag, so cars would be faster and they could develop a new concept while battery technology catch up. Then, when battery technology allow 1000bhp car for a reasonable race distance, they will be faster than F1 cars. Actually with e-power (much higher torque, no big and heavy engine block so weight distribution would be better, etc.) and more efficient aerodynamics (less drag for same DF), they would break F1 laptime records way before power reach similar numbers
They could already run 1000HP hars as I mentioned. As for the weight. It'll not get down to f1 levels anytime soon. Maybe never. Even if electric racecars use 20% the energy it would still require 2500 Wh/kg batteries. Which is more than ten times the current state-of-the-art. But they certainly won't get close without increasing power multi-fold.

Andres125sx
253
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:38 pm

mzso wrote: Then you have trouble with comprehension

[...]

I didn't Pikes Peak cars are more efficient
for once I agree with you, I surely have problems to understand you

Andres125sx
253
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:59 pm

mzso wrote: Racing is not about going around the track as fast as possible, whatever you may believe. It's about competition.
If that´s racing for you, then you should stick with GP2 and GP3. What´s the point for you to watch F1 then when competition is a lot more interesting with standarized cars?

BTW, I´ve downvoted your message because you don´t own the truth. If racing for you is only about competition on track :wink: , ok. To me it´s not only that and competition at the engineering side is also a very interesting part. If you don´t like that part it´s ok, but that´s only your opinion, and both are competitions
mzso wrote:It's worthless to allow aeronautics to dominate racecar design, because it wastes a lot of money for no gain. And only rich teams will have any chance. I said this already, but you failed to comprehend...
I didn´t fail to comprehend anything, but you failed to comprehend the difference between feeder series with standarized cars, and top series like F1

FE right now is in between, as
mzso wrote:They're better off using uniform aerdynamic elements, with focusing design on meaningful stuff.
Do you know FE plan/schedule? It´s public, but you obviously missed it because that´s their plan from day 1, start as standarized cars, then free up gearboxes, then motors and ECUs, then batteries, then....

You´re asking for exactly what they´re doing. BTW, I never said teams should be free to develop anything they want, IMO standarized aero would be a great idea, but that does not mean aero must be the traditional wing cars with flat floors, they could use standarized but modern aero :wink:
mzso wrote:They could already run 1000HP hars as I mentioned. As for the weight. It'll not get down to f1 levels anytime soon. Maybe never. Even if electric racecars use 20% the energy it would still require 2500 Wh/kg batteries. Which is more than ten times the current state-of-the-art. But they certainly won't get close without increasing power multi-fold.
20%? What are you talking about?

And yes, they could be running 1000hp motors... for one or two laps. As stated repeatedly, problem is not electric motors or max power, problem is batteries. Running 1000hp motors you´d need around 1 ton batteries only to match current 30 minutes stints. Maybe you´re so obsessed with power you wouldn´t mind watching 2 ton cars if they provide 1k HP, but to me, and for vast mayority including FE bosses, 800kg is more than enough for racing cars

godlameroso
151
User avatar
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Formula E

Post by godlameroso » Fri Jul 29, 2016 5:48 am

Current energy density and top of the line tech, they could make a 85 kwh battery pack weigh around 380kg, so you could do a 880kg car with about 230kw max output with a 200kw race pace limit, and you could run it for half an hour like they do now. This is what they plan to do not next season but the one after that.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

mzso
0
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:52 pm

Re: Formula E

Post by mzso » Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:49 pm

Andres125sx wrote:I didn´t fail to comprehend anything, but you failed to comprehend the difference between feeder series with standarized cars, and top series like F1

FE right now is in between, as
Wrong. you show a remarkable lack of ability to comprehend the meaning of written language...
Anyway, I'm giving up on you.

BTW. It was you who ignored the distinguishing factors of a top series. They must be fast and powerful. With actual racing tires, instead of whatever nonsense they have now.
Andres125sx wrote:If that´s racing for you, then you should stick with GP2 and GP3. What´s the point for you to watch F1 then when competition is a lot more interesting with standarized cars?
Another round of bullsh*t you conjured up, and trying to put into my mouth. Read again what I wrote, read it a 100 times maybe then you'll comprehend.
(For those who understand language: I wrote aero should be restricted or maybe even uniform)
Andres125sx wrote:Do you know FE plan/schedule? It´s public, but you obviously missed it because that´s their plan from day 1, start as standarized cars, then free up gearboxes, then motors and ECUs, then batteries, then....

You´re asking for exactly what they´re doing. BTW, I never said teams should be free to develop anything they want, IMO standarized aero would be a great idea, but that does not mean aero must be the traditional wing cars with flat floors, they could use standarized but modern aero :wink:
Those are menial stuff. If they'd free up battery sizes and cells, ban gears altogether, etc that would be interesting.

(You stopped pretending that I "said" they should go race with identical cars? Interesting...)
There's no such thing as "modern aero". That's just your impression. Also wing cars don't have flat floors.
Wings are not modern, just fragile with a lot of drag and altogether crappy.
Andres125sx wrote:20%? What are you talking about?
How surprising that you don't understand...
In what way you don't understand using 20% the energy of ICE racecars?
Andres125sx wrote:And yes, they could be running 1000hp motors... for one or two laps. As stated repeatedly, problem is not electric motors or max power, problem is batteries. Running 1000hp motors you´d need around 1 ton batteries only to match current 30 minutes stints. Maybe you´re so obsessed with power you wouldn´t mind watching 2 ton cars if they provide 1k HP, but to me, and for vast mayority including FE bosses, 800kg is more than enough for racing cars
A. I wasn't proposing they should jump to 100HP immediately.
B. What's your problem with heavier but faster cars.
C. You're ignoring (again) the higher energy densitiy chemistries. That one ton could be cut down to half to third of the weight.
D. They could have 2-3 changes. (It's not like F1 and others don't do it.) Your phobia toward that is your problem.
E. So actually it's you're the one who generates the weight issue...

Andres125sx
253
User avatar
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 9:15 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: Formula E

Post by Andres125sx » Fri Jul 29, 2016 6:36 pm

mzso wrote:
Andres125sx wrote:20%? What are you talking about?
How surprising that you don't understand...
In what way you don't understand using 20% the energy of ICE racecars?
In the way that even when my english is far from perfect, I think you did explain it quite poorly
mzso wrote:They could already run 1000HP hars as I mentioned. As for the weight. It'll not get down to f1 levels anytime soon. Maybe never. Even if electric racecars use 20% the energy it would still require 2500 Wh/kg batteries.

Someone whose english is as bad as yours shouldn´t be so arrogant when someone don´t understand you


Anycase I´m done, you can continue bashing FE because they have not done what they are going to do (as planned from day 1) :roll:



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CCBot [Bot] and 1 guest