Horsepower of the engines.

[Brian Coat]

I agree: This is a strong implication that their ICE is now pushing 750hp and PU >900.

This in turn implies 179 g/kwh for the ICE, suggesting a very impressive joint effort by PU and fuel teams.

[r101]

There were stories back in the day (end of 2005) from Renault about their V10s making 1000hp. Presumably that was in qualy mode, but still impressive if true.

[Brian Coat]

Interesting. I've not seen that claimed before. A bit over 950 (maybe) is all I've seen suggested for a 2005 V10 in the past.

Are the revs used by Renault in qualification in 2005 consistent with that hp (no huffer to turn up so it has to come from revs, right?).

[r101]

It's been 10 years since I heard that so I cannot claim what was the source, but it was mentioned several times, even in TV commentary. I got this from a quick google:

http://archive.paddocktalk.com/story-22565.html

Naturally, even if they did somewhat less, they (Renault) would have bent the truth a little for marketing purposes.

[OO7]

The contributors who suggested 850+ hp power figures in the ' Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula' thread, were called crazy last year. Even when senior team members mention such figures (last years estimates), they are usually conservative. I recall Marmorini of Ferrari last year speaking of 650hp for the ICE and during the Engine Gurus PC, in which Cowell mentioned efficiencies pushing 40% plus and Rob White half laughing saying it was a bit more than that. The clues were there.

Anyway these PU are incredible, fantastically efficient.

[Tommy Cookers]

Here comes 3 pages of posts explaining why Cowell cannot possibly be right and is just lying.
The same as every time a team or manufacturer discusses how much power is available.

I assume we are all clear that .....
the only max power figure that can be (with max fuel rate and fuel LCV) legitimately used to calculate efficiency .....
is the ICE power + the mu-k power coming contemperaneously from gu-h action
ie the PU as an electrically compounded engine (in essence similar to earlier mechanically compounded engines)

otherwise there will be false energy accounting from double-counting of some energy flows
energy flows which would not exist if the GPs were a 300 km straight run

the efficiency benefits of these apparently novel engines will translate poorly to road use

[FoxHound]

I do get the fact that people are complaining about the noise, the V10's/V8's were really screaming which was a great experience.

I personally think the V8's sucked, the noise they made was just a painful shrieking noise.

Saw them over a few races live, I agree.

There was nothing organic about the V8. It was just LOUD. Almost as if the pistons in the V8 lost coherence, or simply had the sound engineered into them.
It's also interesting that the V10's the occasional high pitch noise when decelerating, something completely lost on the V8's.... why is that??
This also gives me a blinding excuse to post a video of Hakkinen belting a MP4-16 round Monaco, complete with V10 wail reverberating off the walls. Check the slower sections for the high pitch intake noise....if your ears aren't bleeding from the rest.

[ringo]

These 750bhp from the ICE is very impressive.
I was of the mind it was too much, as it was beyond what i assumed from the combustion process.
I guess the combustion model i used was off, and also my assumptions on the mechanical efficiency and also the compression ratio and fuel. There is so much that we still don't know.
But if what cowell says is true, and the engines are indeed making 750hp, it's 130 more than i expected. And put's the thermal efficiency in a region where you know that little energy is going to water cooling, and combustion temperatures must be super ridiculous.
What i can do is back work from this figure and see what it takes for them to attain these power levels. The fuel will obviously be an unknown. I just have data for typical gasoline.

Anyhow it's kind of sad the engine has 913hp and the cars are so boring to watch. We need to reduce the weight of the car, and bring back refueling, and better tyres. The V10 days were still the better days.

[ringo]

Having looked at my calculator in more detail, i've noticed some nuances i've taken for granted. There are too many unknowns for any of us to predict what these guys are doing with their engines. I have made too many conventional assumptions with the calculations, and given that the multiple injections take place with these engines, it kinds of throws everything out the window as it relates to the states between combustion and the gases leaving the exhaust valves. The engine makers (the good ones) are basically extracting most of the power from ICE by manipulating the natural expansion of the gas, beyond what you could predict with heat capacity ratios, with the multiple injections.
Just by changing the properties of exhuast pressure and temperature by a fraction, it's suprising the difference in power you could acheive with just changes within that combustion and exhuast area. And this is only that area, ignoring everything else.

It's understandable why renault say they aren't concerned with the engine layout. Even the turbine and compressor aren't as impactful as the gains made from combustion.

Guess i got to concede these guys can make crap loads of power with the direct injection.

[Cold Fussion]

Anyhow it's kind of sad the engine has 913hp and the cars are so boring to watch. We need to reduce the weight of the car, and bring back refueling, and better tyres. The V10 days were still the better days.

Part of the problem I think is the camera work as well. There are so many long zoom shots used in F1 broadcasting which really remove any perception of speed. The onboard cameras aren't much better since it looks a letter boxed 4:3 image so a lot of time you don't see much beyond the track surface.

[PlatinumZealot]

There were stories back in the day (end of 2005) from Renault about their V10s making 1000hp. Presumably that was in qualy mode, but still impressive if true.

Yes Ferrari was 990hp in qually mode it was on the website.
BMW and Honda could go over 1000hp in qually mode.

[PlatinumZealot]

The contributors who suggested 850+ hp power figures in the ' Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula' thread, were called crazy last year. Even when senior team members mention such figures (last years estimates), they are usually conservative. I recall Marmorini of Ferrari last year speaking of 650hp for the ICE and during the Engine Gurus PC, in which Cowell mentioned efficiencies pushing 40% plus and Rob White half laughing saying it was a bit more than that. The clues were there.

Anyway these PU are incredible, fantastically efficient.

Blaze I know you understand that as engineers we cannot just believe rumors without any sort of good reasoning behind them, we have to use the tools and techniques that we know. This why our horsepower numbers were in the 850hp range. With new information from Andy Cowell it is clear that all we have to adjust in our engine calculators is the friction loss and combustion efficiency factors. It appears that our assumptions on these were based on older (outdated?) knowledge in combusiton, tribology and material engineering. Of course Andy Cowell has told us the real number, and we will believe him because he is the most credible source. It doesn't make other members who only follow any rumor they here any better than us, the brave ones who use our engineering skills to take a shot though. In the end it results in a great exchange of knowledge across the site. I have learnt so much new things about engine technology this year alone.

[pgfpro]

I'm extremely happy these new engines are making more power then most would of thought!!! F1 engineers are the best at what they do and with the new stringent fuel rules they once again have push technology forward with great success.

I wonder if what we are seeing for the first time is a new "efficiency law" of what happens when you take a turbo power ICE and add a outside force MGUK to help drive the crankshaft in conjunction with the ICE. Or maybe the second time now that I think about it Wright R-3350 Turbo Compound engine. lol

This is the area I can't seem to calculate what happens to the ICE when you add the MGUK in to the equation???? So in my calculations I keep the ICE engine BSFC numbers the same with no improvement? I'm not smart enough to figure this out so I went as far as I purchased a 2000 Honda insight Hybrid that I'm installing a turbo on and I'm going to study the effects of turbo load and electric motor assist and see if BSFC will change???

[PlatinumZealot]

Sorry to say, but turbo charging your insight hybrid won't give you any insight into how the MGUK deliver's power.

It is loosely related becuase turbo charging you insight will just give it more horsepower but your electric motor will charge and discharge the battery just as usual.

The real key to these thermal efficiency improvments in F1 is cutting edge combustion technicques and friction reduction.

Also try not to confuse thermal efficiency with fuel mileage. All the engines in F1 can do the same fuel mileage if they need to.

The f1 cars achieve fuel mileage by storing energy when it is not needed and then using it when needed.

[ringo]

I think for this formula, more than turbo charging and the electrical power, the direct injection and fuel pressure technology is the star here. Also the tools used to conduct combustion analysis.
I am not surprised that a big manufacturer like Mercedes built the best engine, the amount of work put in to make everything perfect requires very specific and expensive equipment, tools, existing research records and personnel. The design of the fuel injectors and fuel alone go a far way in combustion performance.