wuzak wrote: ↑
Wed May 29, 2019 7:31 am
Zynerji wrote: ↑
Tue May 28, 2019 6:58 pm
My thoughts are towards going back to the NA 2.4v8 DI/TJI (Frozen at the end of 2022), twin Unlimited GU-H on the exhaust, Unlimited MU-K on engine, and front wheel Unlimited MU-K hub motors. No Battery, just a small Supercapacitor bank for balancing. Move to LNG, with fuel "pods" that can pop-and-swap during a pitstop.
Noise (RPM), power(torque), direct GU->MU drive(no trickery). Put triggers on the steering wheel that gives the driver the ability to "boost" an individual front wheel during cornering for another driver-input dimension.
I can always dream...
They couldn't just update the old 2.4 V8s, they'd have to start again.
The old V8s weren't DI, let alone TJI. Also not sure how well TJI would work with a N/A engine.
Just the heads, probably a derivative of the current v6 tech. They have already proven bulletproof reliability of their V8 short blocks. By updating the short block with the current V6 head technology, I believe they can get 20000 RPM pretty reasonably at a good fuel consumption. The real question is, does TJI have any benefit in a non boosted engine, and does the VLIM supercharge enough to offset this restriction.
Twin MGUHs would muffle the sound and cause back pressure that the old V8s couldn't handle.
Hardly. Please provide math/proof since you are stating this as a fact. And these are GU, not MGU. We currently have 6 into 1, where my idea would have 4 into 1, but half the size. And 20000 RPM instead of 12000 should overcome this concern. Even running twin, current sized units at 1.2L each, instead of 1.6L would probably work as you are deleting the work done by the compressor.
I expect that the proposed engine would lose 100hp over the current configuration and, possibly, weigh more. If they are to meet the fuel flow regulations in current use, the power loss could be more.
No battery means no boost where the cars need them the most - out of slow corners.
2.4l v8 was about 875hp, 225ft-lb @ 18000rpm. Adding another 200-300hp through the GU-H -> MU-K would increase low end torque, and high rpm power. Battery loss saves huge amounts of weight. Front Hub motors will add about 7kg to each wheel. I think my suggestion would still come at a net lowering of weight, and a net increase of tractive power from AWD.
Why LNG? Why not hydrogen, produced from electrolysis from renewable energy, of course?
Any fuel that makes sense in a pit-swappable, pressurized "pod" is fine. I'm just after the safety of quick change fuel. Anything that allows the cars to carry less fuel while on track will help the tyres by decreasing the variance of the full fuel weight and the low fuel weight. That will allow the teams to dial in the tyres far better I believe. This would also remove parts like fuel pumps and such.