F1technical.net

wuzak wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 09:57

AR3-GP wrote: ↑

01 Feb 2023, 21:20

However, theplan is not easy to implement, because the new power units will be devoid of an important source of energy recovery such as the MGU-H

So the reason we can't drop 40kg from the cars is because they got rid of the MGU-H

Minimum mass for current power units is 150kg, including MGUK, MGUH, turbo and some other items.

Minimum mass for internal combustion engine (including turbo) in 2026 is 130kg.

Minimum mass of MGUK in 2026 is 16kg.

Minimum mass of MGUK transmission unit (to connect to crankshaft) in 2026 is 4kg.


130kg + 16kg + 4kg means no mass savings whatsoever!

If they chopped off 2 cylinders and had a 1L V4 they would save maybe 30kg (V6 =118, 2/3 = 78.7).

V6 would also be shorter, helping with COG considerations when shortening the wheelbase.

You could probably save more by going to an L3.

I wonder if they allowed more PUs per season if they could be a little lighter as well.

wuzak wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 09:57

AR3-GP wrote: ↑

01 Feb 2023, 21:20

However, theplan is not easy to implement, because the new power units will be devoid of an important source of energy recovery such as the MGU-H

So the reason we can't drop 40kg from the cars is because they got rid of the MGU-H

Minimum mass for current power units is 150kg, including MGUK, MGUH, turbo and some other items.

Minimum mass for internal combustion engine (including turbo) in 2026 is 130kg.

Minimum mass of MGUK in 2026 is 16kg.

Minimum mass of MGUK transmission unit (to connect to crankshaft) in 2026 is 4kg.


130kg + 16kg + 4kg means no mass savings whatsoever!

If they chopped off 2 cylinders and had a 1L V4 they would save maybe 30kg (V6 =118, 2/3 = 78.7).

V6 would also be shorter, helping with COG considerations when shortening the wheelbase.

You could probably save more by going to an L3.

In that case the MGU-H is massless!!!
In practice this means that engines will require further ballast to meet the weight target (some already are doing this).
What are the target masses for each (ICE, MGU-K & MGU-H) currently?

Note: will look at regs shortly!!

wuzak wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 09:57

AR3-GP wrote: ↑

01 Feb 2023, 21:20

However, theplan is not easy to implement, because the new power units will be devoid of an important source of energy recovery such as the MGU-H

So the reason we can't drop 40kg from the cars is because they got rid of the MGU-H

Minimum mass for current power units is 150kg, including MGUK, MGUH, turbo and some other items.

Minimum mass for internal combustion engine (including turbo) in 2026 is 130kg.

Minimum mass of MGUK in 2026 is 16kg.

Minimum mass of MGUK transmission unit (to connect to crankshaft) in 2026 is 4kg.


130kg + 16kg + 4kg means no mass savings whatsoever!

If they chopped off 2 cylinders and had a 1L V4 they would save maybe 30kg (V6 =118, 2/3 = 78.7).

V6 would also be shorter, helping with COG considerations when shortening the wheelbase.

You could probably save more by going to an L3.

I'll take some extra weight in order to skip having a 3 or 4 cylinder.

Making them smaller and allowing some lower minimum weights should help plenty.

2015 cars weighed 702kg. The cars can be brought down to this without issue if fuel tanks are smaller and weight is saved a few other areas (lighter standard wheel, slightly skinnier tires and brakes etc).

Stu wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 10:39

In that case the MGU-H is massless!!!
In practice this means that engines will require further ballast to meet the weight target (some already are doing this).
What are the target masses for each (ICE, MGU-K & MGU-H) currently?

Note: will look at regs shortly!!

No MGU-H in 2026, that's why there are so many new makers flocking...

Yeah, but if the PU is losing the MGU-H (& split turbos, I think), there should be a definable mass saving. However the PU mass will remain as it is now; does this simply mean that they expect the MGU-K to be bigger/heavier to cope with the increase in regen?

Stu wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 20:44

Yeah, but if the PU is losing the MGU-H (& split turbos, I think), there should be a definable mass saving. However the PU mass will remain as it is now; does this simply mean that they expect the MGU-K to be bigger/heavier to cope with the increase in regen?

I think so. Maybe ICE will also be slightly heavier, not sure tbh. A missed chance for sure. All in the name of cost cuts and cheaper development.

Less MGU-H the engines will lose a minimum of four kgs.

Stu wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 20:44

Yeah, but if the PU is losing the MGU-H (& split turbos, I think), there should be a definable mass saving. However the PU mass will remain as it is now; does this simply mean that they expect the MGU-K to be bigger/heavier to cope with the increase in regen?

2026 MGUK minimum 16kg.

Current regulations
MGUK minimum 7kg
MGUH minimum 4kg

wuzak wrote: ↑

04 Feb 2023, 10:21

Stu wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 20:44

Yeah, but if the PU is losing the MGU-H (& split turbos, I think), there should be a definable mass saving. However the PU mass will remain as it is now; does this simply mean that they expect the MGU-K to be bigger/heavier to cope with the increase in regen?

2026 MGUK minimum 16kg.

Current regulations
MGUK minimum 7kg
MGUH minimum 4kg

The MGU-K will be responsible for basically double the power level that it is responsible for now. So it will likely need much heavier copper windings and cooling architecture.

arees83 wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 11:45

2015 cars weighed 702kg. The cars can be brought down to this without issue if fuel tanks are smaller and weight is saved a few other areas (lighter standard wheel, slightly skinnier tires and brakes etc).

A lot of weight was added with Bernie Formula of 2017, wider cars and wider wheels.

Another mystery - Why FIA allowed the turbo charger to be placed within the gearbox in 2014.

I would assume that by selecting a single turbocharger for the whole PU it made sense from a packaging point of view. The split-turbo would not have been predicted. Indycar/IRL have run turbos in this location for decades (they were only allowed a single turbo).
With clutches getting smaller the connection between PU and gearbox is otherwise largely empty, but is needed to be a particular size as it critical to the car structure.
The excessive lengths of this connection currently is what is also allowing the rear suspension to be housed within as well (this would previously have been packed around the gearbox structure).

FW17 wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2023, 19:24

arees83 wrote: ↑

03 Feb 2023, 11:45

2015 cars weighed 702kg. The cars can be brought down to this without issue if fuel tanks are smaller and weight is saved a few other areas (lighter standard wheel, slightly skinnier tires and brakes etc).

A lot of weight was added with Bernie Formula of 2017, wider cars and wider wheels.

Another mystery - Why FIA allowed the turbo charger to be placed within the gearbox in 2014.

They gained 26kg to become 728kg. Shouldn't be hard to get down to that weight or less.

Didn't Indy cars have the turbo in the transmission case for years?

2026+ batteries will weigh too much due to el./ICE power ratio, so that's a big hurdle for weight reduction.

arees83 wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2023, 21:20

Didn't Indy cars have the turbo in the transmission case for years?

No they were on top on the gearbox

FW17 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2023, 06:54

arees83 wrote: ↑

06 Feb 2023, 21:20

Didn't Indy cars have the turbo in the transmission case for years?

No they were on top on the gearbox

Rob dahm is building a 90s Indy car on his channel and mentioned the turbo sat in a housing that was part of the gearbox. I just assumed they all did that at the time.