How would a cheap engine compare?

[NL_Fer]

With two teams with no engine deal, Renault still not confirming it's plans and an old but influencial fool crying again for old engines. I wouldn' t be supprised if a Redbull twin turbo would enter the field next year.

So if for example the proposed V6 twin turbo with standard 120kw KERS would return, next to the hybrids. How would they compare. Say they would allow and uncreased fuel flow and larger tank.

At the start, they would have more fuel/weight and more tyre wear, but at the end they could make up for it. Any idea's?

[hurril]

With two teams with no engine deal, Renault still not confirming it's plans and an old but influencial fool crying again for old engines. I wouldn' t be supprised if a Redbull twin turbo would enter the field next year.

So if for example the proposed V6 twin turbo with standard 120kw KERS would return, next to the hybrids. How would they compare. Say they would allow and uncreased fuel flow and larger tank.

At the start, they would have more fuel/weight and more tyre wear, but at the end they could make up for it. Any idea's?

Increased fuel flow and capacity just for the proposed twin-turbo configuration?

[Jolle]

What makes the current 4 engines so expensive, is not the ERS or the turbo, it's that they are without compromise. A similar configuration with all the bits, but 50 HP less and 20kg heavier would prob not even cost half as much as the current engines. It's the rule that you got to have the same engine as the works team that makes it so expensive.

[NL_Fer]

With two teams with no engine deal, Renault still not confirming it's plans and an old but influencial fool crying again for old engines. I wouldn' t be supprised if a Redbull twin turbo would enter the field next year.

So if for example the proposed V6 twin turbo with standard 120kw KERS would return, next to the hybrids. How would they compare. Say they would allow and uncreased fuel flow and larger tank.

At the start, they would have more fuel/weight and more tyre wear, but at the end they could make up for it. Any idea's?

Increased fuel flow and capacity just for the proposed twin-turbo configuration?

Yes, they would be useless with the same 100kg/h and just the hybrid turbo taken out.

[NL_Fer]

Since the fia is getting more serious about his low tech engine, i still can't figure out how it must be integrated in the field. The lose of the hybrid mgu-h turbocharger en smaller ES would make it lighter, so faster during q. But they have to take more fuel during the race, so they will be to heavy at the start.

[Andres125sx]

How would they compare

They will be like FIA wants it to be, they could be faster or slower, as always it will depend on rules restrictions


It´d be comical if you ask me, F1, the supposed pinnacle of motorsports, adopting Indy engines. Not sure if I should laugh or cry...

[PlatinumZealot]

Yea.

Cause of the cheapness of it it might be inferior in certain qualities:

1) lower power to weight ratio
2) lower expected life
3) higher fuel consumption per MegaJoule of ERS allowed
4) lower power per displacement per bar of boost
5) Inferior technology (Example port injection)

So in effect to be competitive a cheaper engine will need a combination of any of these:

more fuel
more displacement
more revs
less km per engine
more boost
more ERS contribution

So the FIA can play with these parameters to equalise it. Note that they could simply convert an Indy car engine to use any Magnetti Marelli ERS system and it would work OK once the engine mapping is sorted. It just would need different regulations to be competitive. I think the simplest of these parameters to change in the regulations would be the fuel allowed per race, the fuel flow and the number of engines per season.

[langwadt]

Yea.

Cause of the cheapness of it it might be inferior in certain qualities:

1) lower power to weight ratio
2) lower expected life
3) higher fuel consumption per MegaJoule of ERS allowed
4) lower power per displacement per bar of boost
5) Inferior technology (Example port injection)

So in effect to be competitive a cheaper engine will need a combination of any of these:

more fuel
more displacement
more revs
less km per engine
more boost
more ERS contribution

So the FIA can play with these parameters to equalise it. Note that they could simply convert an Indy car engine to use any Magnetti Marelli ERS system and it would work OK once the engine mapping is sorted. It just would need different regulations to be competitive. I think the simplest of these parameters to change in the regulations would be the fuel allowed per race, the fuel flow and the number of engines per season.

I don't see it working, either it'll be too slow and the team running might as well stay home, or it'll be too fast and the manufacturers of the expensive engines will be pissed that they spend tons of money only to be laughed at for being too slow

[PlatinumZealot]

At first when I heard of this proposal I sorta saw it working if the FIA Submitted the engine to be used on the dynamometers of Mercedes Ferrari, Renault and Honda for these respective manufacturers to test them. Then again... that in it self will open up another can of worms.

Supposed Mercedes says it is fair to apply a handicap factor of X to this engine, and Ferrari says no! only apply a factor of Y! if you apply X it will be too powerful, and then honda comes along and says wait up FIA, this engine is too powerful with X apply a factor of W! haha yes you are right it will be a mess. Maybe the FIA can average the handicaps given by the four teams?

[chip engineer]

At first when I heard of this proposal I sorta saw it working if the FIA Submitted the engine to be used on the dynamometers of Mercedes Ferrari, Renault and Honda for these respective manufacturers to test them. Then again... that in it self will open up another can of worms.

Supposed Mercedes says it is fair to apply a handicap factor of X to this engine, and Ferrari says no! only apply a factor of Y! if you apply X it will be too powerful, and then honda comes along and says wait up FIA, this engine is too powerful with X apply a factor of W! haha yes you are right it will be a mess. Maybe the FIA can average the handicaps given by the four teams?

How about something objective like:
Start with 10% more fuel allowed (both measures) for the cheap engines. Keep required races per engine the same.
For each race calculate the average points scored per car using the cheap engine and for cars using the expensive engines.
Increase (or decrease) the extra fuel by 0.1% for each point difference in average points per car.
By half way though the season, average performance should be fairly equal.

[piast9]

Yea.

Cause of the cheapness of it it might be inferior in certain qualities:

1) lower power to weight ratio
2) lower expected life
3) higher fuel consumption per MegaJoule of ERS allowed
4) lower power per displacement per bar of boost
5) Inferior technology (Example port injection)

I am of the opinion that the lower expected life would be the main consequence. If the engine is already designed then the manufacturing is the main cost generator.

If it was possible to make 10 times cheaper engines which last only 1 weekend then we would have saved half of the money. I am not sure is it is possible.

I was thinking about another engine formula. All engine manufactures would be separated from the teams and the engines would be ordered by the FIA for fixed amount of money per season. And muuuuuch lower amount of money than today. Then the engines would be supplied to the teams. That's all. Maybe the limit of fuel energy per race would also be reasonable to stop the power from raising insanely and forbiding poisonous materials or fuels.

Apart from that - total freedom. You want the hybrid engine - go ahead. If you want simple but lighter power unit - your'e welcome. Then the winner would be the clever one, who is best at managing the money to produce the best power unit. And I am sure that if there were no so strict constrains on the power units then the same level of the power and not much less efficiency would be possible to achieve using much less money.

[ian_s]

the FIA already know how to balance different engines, just look at the WEC.
i'd love to see an F1 car built around this years Porsche WEC PU, and the FIA could just turn the fuel flow limit down if they prove too fast.

[Shooty81]

There is one issue with any BOP:
when different concepts should perform at the same level, the easiest way is to be the only competitor to us a certain concept. So you can build an inferior car, use a different powerunit, and get yor Performance balanced to match te other concepts.

Probably one o the the reasons why Porsche and Audi both participated at LeMans...

[ian_s]

i'm sure the WEC BOP wasnt done on pure performance though, it was done on power output. the FIA could mandate torque sensors to be used on every car, and turn the fuel limit up or down on the 'budget' engine accordingly. so long as more than one team use the engine, intentionally building a slow car is a big risk.

[Pierce89]

There is one issue with any BOP:
when different concepts should perform at the same level, the easiest way is to be the only competitor to us a certain concept. So you can build an inferior car, use a different powerunit, and get yor Performance balanced to match te other concepts.

Probably one o the the reasons why Porsche and Audi both participated at LeMans...

Well, also in the WEC, Aston and the Corvette are the same concept/configuration but Aston gets huge BOP breaks compared to the Corvette. in Lmp1, balance is only diesel vs gas, so the NA Toyota suffers against the turbo Porsche.