Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
I think the trend is clearly running AGAINST major manufacturers entering F1. Toyota has enormous cash reserves (they can buy GM and Ford, pay cash, and still have plenty left over), but they have announced (earlier this week at a dealer meeting) that the money they would have spent on F1 will be used to create a family of Prius hybrids and -- wait for it -- a family performance cars. The FT86 will be followed by more sports/performance cars.
Why dump LOTS of money into F1, which MIGHT lead to more sales, when the same funds can be used to create more and better models that WILL lead to more sales?
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill
Looks like the engine manufacturers want to keep continue the current engine format beyond 2012. Porsche will only enter if the engine format is to be changed.
WhiteBlue wrote:What people continually disregard is the fact that Porsche brought in new money and that they are operationally healthy.
We've already been through this WB...... Porsche turned into a pyramid hedge fund which superficially made them look flush with cash, which they then lost just as easily, and their car sales relied rather too much on the Cayenne.
They are not operationally healthy in any way and certainly in no position to undertake new and risky motorsport ventures while their parent company is still trying to get a grip on things.
segedunum wrote:We've already been through this WB...... Porsche turned into a pyramid hedge fund which superficially made them look flush with cash, which they then lost just as easily, and their car sales relied rather too much on the Cayenne.
They are not operationally healthy in any way and certainly in no position to undertake new and risky motorsport ventures while their parent company is still trying to get a grip on things.
You obviously have no idea what operational health means. Everything they lost in Cayenne sales numbers they added in Panamera and increased the sales volume by a healthy double digit figure. Any car company making close to 12% profit on increasing sales in the last nine month is robustly healthy.
Durheimer, Porsche CTO@AMuS wrote:If Porsche was to go to formula one, then it would only be with its own team, because you need complete control over all the competition-related factors, including the car and its technology. Porsche is a very profitable company, we can afford that.
What are you trying to demonstrate here? I have posted the relevant figures so please read them and stop trolling. Operational figures and financial figures are two entirely different things in economics. When Porsche or Audi will run their 2013 F1 development program the take over battle and it's financial results will be history.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
Imagine that, when this Durheimer is not just anyone, buying an xisting team? "No way, we will show tham how it's done!"
Wonder what we can expect from the creme de la creme of engineers this time, a 270 degree V8 installed upside down?
=D> =D> well ...it´d would be a flat four ...downsizing has arrived even at Weissach some birds in my area seem to sing....
If that would make a winning F1 propulsion ..of course ..german engineering ..we do not care if the general idea is good ..we know how to implement it better than anyone
...a Porsche F1 team ? Durrheimer? Safe bet to create Indicar desaster reloaded (lets show them idiots how it´s done...)
Durrheimer is a Series Development guy and I´m not sure if he does understand the difference between Lmp racing and Formula1.I could be wrong of course ..but tbh the undoubted commercial success Porsche has with their products is not necessarily a product of the outstanding product qualities (be it performance or build or development)
One small hint there:where exactly is Porsche Industry leading with their technology?
They never were and will not .Invention is not even wanted in their engineering
approach (see car layout).I think one rare exception was their twin clutch gearbox they had racing in Group C times already.But apart from this it is just the whole
product composition -the end product- that is special not the incredients.
segedunum wrote:We've already been through this WB...... Porsche turned into a pyramid hedge fund which superficially made them look flush with cash, which they then lost just as easily, and their car sales relied rather too much on the Cayenne.
They are not operationally healthy in any way and certainly in no position to undertake new and risky motorsport ventures while their parent company is still trying to get a grip on things.
You obviously have no idea what operational health means. Everything they lost in Cayenne sales numbers they added in Panamera and increased the sales volume by a healthy double digit figure. Any car company making close to 12% profit on increasing sales in the last nine month is robustly healthy.
Durheimer, Porsche CTO@AMuS wrote:If Porsche was to go to formula one, then it would only be with its own team, because you need complete control over all the competition-related factors, including the car and its technology. Porsche is a very profitable company, we can afford that.
What are you trying to demonstrate here? I have posted the relevant figures so please read them and stop trolling. Operational figures and financial figures are two entirely different things in economics. When Porsche or Audi will run their 2013 F1 development program the take over battle and it's financial results will be history.
In support of your point WB, it is worth noting that Porsche was the most profitable car company in the world. In the 911 it also has the most profitable model in the world.
This came from a very sound business model and healthy profit margins across its range. Their woes stemmed from over-leveraging themselves buying into VW in the well publicised and ill-concieved takeover attempt.
The core business is sound, and more than justifies its own F1 programme should the need arise. Perspective of this comes from the fact all car companies where in dire straights around the time of Porsche/VW saga....
xpensive wrote:@ marcush; Try a little Machiavelli, "The prince" is very good reading.
Btw, where do you think Porsche will place the "hairdryer" this time around, in front of the engine, or perhaps beneath it?
clearly you got the concept:the flat four will need to be placed on top of the biturbo exhaust arrangement just to make absolutely sure you will have issues with the compressor side filling with oil whenever possible...
when did you hear of that?
You only have to look at the Panamera biturbo 90° V8 to see that Porsche can design and build other engines than flat six. I'm pretty sure that VW/Porsche will not return to F1 unless F1 launches the new engine formula.
Formula One's fundamental ethos is about success coming to those with the most ingenious engineering and best ..............................organization, not to those with the biggest budget. (Dave Richards)
these two engines ...what have they in common with current f1 technology ,save the working principle?
Have you physically seen a flat6 Boxer engine of 2010 ? or the Cayenne/Panamera lump....
and check the rpm levels of these direct injection units .... or even the rpm and power levels of the angry engine (DI 3.4 spider)...I´m not quite sure if much could be carried over of the current technology to a DI screamer with turbos,but thats just my opinion.
and to add ,some porsche technobabble on intrduction of the angry engine:
Direct Fuel Injection Lowers Fuel Consumption and Increases Performance in 3.4-Liter V8 for 2008 Porsche RS Spyder in the American Le Mans Series
ATLANTA - July 31 - Following in the footsteps of the street Porsche Cayenne and 911, the sports prototype Porsche RS Spyder now profits from direct fuel injection technology (DFI). The new engine, with which Porsche underlines its role as technology leader in energy efficiency, celebrated its race premiere with an LMP2 victory in the American Le Mans Series as Timo Bernhard (Germany) and Romain Dumas (France) took the class win at Mid-Ohio earlier this month. The power output of the successful 2006 and 2007 championship winning Porsche, which has so far claimed victory from four of the six races run in this year's ALMS, increased with the new engine from 476 to 503 hp (370 kW) at 10,000 revs per minute. Maximum torque rose from 370 Nm (273 ft. lbs.) at 7,500 revs to 385 Nm (284 ft. lbs.) at 8,500 revs. The most compelling feature of the DFI version of the successful Porsche 3.4-litre V8 motor is its improved energy efficiency - an important element in endurance racing. Despite an improved power output, fuel consumption was significantly reduced.
After reaching a very high level with the previous engine we raced, we had to put considerable efforts into the development of the direct fuel injection unit in order to significantly improve performance and efficiency," says Thomas Laudenbach, Head of Motorsport Development/Power Train. "In order to achieve revs of up to 11,000 with DFI technology it meant stepping into totally new territory." During the design and development of the engine, synergies of product areas and motorsport departments were utilized to a large extent. "Right from the beginning there was a lively exchange," reminisces Thomas Laudenbach. "We had already recognized the advantages of this technology at the start of the RS Spyder project and adapted them to the very special requirements of motorsport, always in close consultation with our colleagues in the standard development department. The methods and insights we obtained from our co-operation are of considerable value for future development projects involving DFI technology."
Normally an increased engine output is in conjunction with a rise in fuel consumption. This is not the case here. "Thanks to the substantial increase of energy efficiency there's no rise in the absolute fuel consumption despite the significant hike in performance. On the contrary - we're even a bit lower," said Laudenbach. Another advantage of the new DFI engine: At partial load - for example during the many caution phases of long distance races - the engine can be run extremely lean. This further reduces fuel consumption and was not possible with the intake manifold fuel injection which was raced previously.
Moreover, new options open up for the controlling of highly dynamic processes like, for example, gear shifting at full throttle. Such options were not fully utilized before. After the successful premiere in Mid-Ohio, the new DFI motor will power the two Penske Racing RS Spyder cars for the next round next week at Road America in Elkhart Lake, Wisconsin. With this, Porsche intends to strengthen its top position in the American Le Mans Series. "Competition in the LMP2 class is at an extremely high level and it gets tougher race by race," says Hartmut Kristen, Head of Motorsport at Porsche. "Therefore now is exactly the right time to race the new engine." # # #
that engine is literally a smoker...unbelievable clouds of black particles following...
marcush. wrote:these two engines ...what have they in common with current f1 technology ,save the working principle?
What has a current F1 engine in common with the original proposed 2013 F1 engine concept ( 1.6l t/c I4 engine), save the working principle?
And where precisly have the current F1 engine manufacturers a technological advantage in the area of turbo charged I4 engines with a rev and boost limit?
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
marcush. wrote:these two engines ...what have they in common with current f1 technology ,save the working principle?
What has a current F1 engine in common with the original proposed 2013 F1 engine concept ( 1.6l t/c I4 engine), save the working principle?
And where precisly have the current F1 engine manufacturers a technological advantage in the area of turbo charged I4 engines with a rev and boost limit?
Maybe I´m too pessimistic there and after all :
the V8 3.4 engine of the Spyder Porsche is tantalisingly close in displacement cutting of four cylinders would give you almost a ballpark figure in terms of displacement.would Porsche investigate the project using components of that to start ?
WhiteBlue wrote:You obviously have no idea what operational health means.
WB......Do you always deliberately not read what people have written? Did you not read the part about them creating a very large pyramid scheme involving VW shares to make their financial position look far more healthy than it actually was?
It doesn't matter in the slightest how they've managed to wangle the unit profit margin - the company headed towards bankruptcy and VW took them over. That's it. That's not healthy in anyone's book, nor is VW going to sanction an engine building programme before they've fully taken over the organisation. Not going to happen. Period.
