F1technical.net

Whatch out the speed trap in the turkish qualy:

Pos No Driver Time of Day Speed
1 1 Kimi Räikkonen 14:32:35 323.8
2 2 Felipe Massa 14:19:34 323.7
3 22 Lewis Hamilton 14:59:21 319.8
4 8 Kazuki Nakajima 14:05:00 317.1
5 23 Heikki Kovalainen 14:09:43 317.1
6 7 Nico Rosberg 14:20:02 316.1
7 10 Mark Webber 14:33:40 314.9
8 5 Fernando Alonso 14:55:15 314.9
9 12 Timo Glock 14:33:38 314.5
10 4 Robert Kubica 14:55:20 314.2
11 6 Nelsinho Piquet 14:20:20 314.1
12 9 David Coulthard 14:19:56 313.7
13 11 Jarno Trulli 14:33:33 313.7
14 3 Nick Heidfeld 15:00:43 312.5
15 14 Sebastien Bourdais 14:19:46 311.3
16 17 Rubens Barrichello 14:35:14 311.0
17 15 Sebastian Vettel 14:33:26 310.9
18 21 G.Fisichella 14:18:21 310.7
19 20 Adrian Sutil 14:05:11 310.5
20 16 Jenson Button 14:34:12 309.7

At least makes you suspect something

I've taken the license to do a quick estimation. If one assumes the McLaren engine has 760 HP (won't be ver far from that), that both top speeds were managed in a perfect run without slipstream and that both cars are equally efficient (many things, I know), the speed difference between Hamilton and Raikkonen equals a power difference of slightly over 28 HP.

Whith this data, people can believe that the Ferrari has 30 HP more than the second or third best engine, or believe that is because neither Hamilton nor Kovalainen take Turns 9 and 10 decently, or, finally, that the Ferrari is more efficient at high speeds.

EDIT: Assuming the same holds for Fernando Alonso's Renault, we'd have Ferrari (+28) McLaren (760) and Renault (-36). I'm sorry, but I can't believe the Renault has just 724 HP. After all, they won the 2006 WCC with this V8. Of course, the Renault is another beast, because they have admitted they need to run a lot of wing to compensate the lack of mechanical grip. However... apex speed at Turn8 still has the Ferraris on top or nearly there. Don't be mislead, the Ferrari is an exceptional aerodynamic machine, and more HP is probably just icing on the cake.

100% agre with Miguel - look at Nakajima and Glock... hmm, Williams seems to have 30hps over Toyota, wait... it's the same engine!
Top speed in F1 is mostly dependant on aero than hps, it was for a long time. Faster starts may be of more relevance - but teams may have different maps for starts.

timbo wrote:100% agre with Miguel - look at Nakajima and Glock... hmm, Williams seems to have 30hps over Toyota, wait... it's the same engine! :D

And see how Kimi has 100hp more than Vettel and Sutil :).

flynfrog wrote:

donskar wrote:and is constructed out of a beryllium-unobtainium alloy. After all, how can you beat a cheater with a legal car?

unobtainium Ive been trying to source that for years

Don't forget about unaffordium. That's shits expensive!

The reason why Ferrari are so quick is because they have optimised the ECU and the engine torque curve along with some developments from Shell on fuel.

That's what some told me, who works in Shell (Indian section though)

Miguel wrote: Let's have a look at a couple of current rear wings: the McLaren MP4-23 (or -22, I'm not sure) and the Renault R28
It's commonly said that the rear wing generates around 1/3 of the total downforce. As I have nearly no idea of aerodynamics, I'll use this value. Taking tire mu as 1.7, and as the cars go through Turn 8 at over 4g's, we'd have a rear wing providing over 270 kG at that corner. I don't believe these wings don't flex under those loads... especially when the top plane appears to be supported with "hinges". I'd go as far as saying that the rear wing mount favours a reduction of Cx at high speed. In a sense, these wings are also using a loophole.

I believe the issue is not if it bends or not, but how much it bends...

In any case, and as Colin Chapman used to say, "Rules are for the interpretation of wise men and obedience of fools". So it's up to the FIA to report how much has changed and the other teams to complain or follow (if they wish to do so).

HKS wrote:

The reason why Ferrari are so quick is because they have optimised the ECU and the engine torque curve along with some developments from Shell on fuel.

That's what some told me, who works in Shell (Indian section though)

Fuel or oil? This is what F1 live says:

A Ferrari official has played down reports that the Italian team exploited a 'loophole' to race ahead in the engine horse power stakes in 2008.

It was reported on Friday that Ferrari may have used the pretext of boosting reliability to add up to 25 more horse power to its V8 unit this year, despite the so-called 'freeze' on engine development.

But an unnamed Ferrari chief is quoted as saying by the German newspaper Bild: "Our new oil system is simply working better. It flows faster and brings more power."

Ferrari spokesman Luca Colajanni added: "Everything has been done according to the permitted limits."

When they limit the things you can work with, you just don´t grab your budget and put it somewere else outside F1. You go and use it with the things you still can improve and develop.

The engine freeze maybe say nothing about oils. You can improve some, getting oil to work better, but 25HP seems too much to me. It´s not that F1 teams were using a common SAE 15W40 and now Ferrari have discovered fire.

how do they power oil and pneumatic pumps in F1? http://www.f1technical.net/articles/8766 mechanically from the engine as far as I know. what if they do it electrically with energy mainly generated at braking. BMW road cars do it that way to save energy. in F1 you have 3 or 4 oild pumps that canibalize some shaft power. they could do it to avoid the power scavenging and use regenerated energy. that would not be illegal because the energy would not fed to the drive train but to the ancillary systems. they would obviously need a bigger generator and battery but that would come out of ballast weight.

What has F1 come to? We'd all like to believe it's the pinnacle of motor sports. But here we are arguing about whether teams are allowed/should try to strive for more HP. THIS IS INSANE!

Any team that is NOT attempting to do EVERYTHING possible to go faster within the rules should be ashamed.

And for any paranoids/conspiracy theorists out there, here's the results of a test I read about a few years ago:

A Nissan, powered by a 2 liter 4 cylinder is strapped down to a chassis dyno.
Result: 120 HP at the wheels
Then the engine and transaxle are drained of their conventional lubricant, which is then replaced with Royal Purple synthetic engine oil and transaxle lube.
Result: 124 HP at the wheels
That's about a 3% increase, totally legal. If better lubes could produce half that increase (1.5%) in an F1 engine, the result woould be the "double digit" increase referred to in an earlier post.

Another example: way back when engine development was allowed, Ferrari revealed that changing its Shell fuel blend provided an additional 7 HP.
That was only a 1% increase, and the blend was legal.

Finally, smarter posters than me have stressed the important points:
1) standing starts are influenced by torque (NOT HP), mechanical grip, clutch settings, engine mapping and other factors within the rules
2) Top speed is strongly influenced by aerodynamic efficiency, drafting, wing settings, etc


BTW: I get my Unobtainium from Erewhon Geophysical And Dynamics (EGAD) in Zazzaf, Patagonia.

donskar wrote:Finally, smarter posters than me have stressed the important points:
1) standing starts are influenced by torque (NOT HP), mechanical grip, clutch settings, engine mapping and other factors within the rules
2) Top speed is strongly influenced by aerodynamic efficiency, drafting, wing settings, etc

Totally right. That´s why I won´t say that Ferrari has 25HP+.

BTW, those Lubricant tests are mere publicity in 99% of the cases. If you drain oil and fill the engine with water, maybe you get more power and 10 later minutes your engine explodes. Using different specification oil CAN make you gain those 25HP, but in F1 all is at its limits and leaps foward are not often so big in that field.

At points in Turkey the Ferrari's were 15kph faster in the speed trap, than anyone else!

Not just down to better lubes and fuel?

not if you use the official data http://www.formula1.com/results/season/ ... _trap.html

Pos No Driver Time of Day Speed
1 1 Kimi Räikkönen 14:32:35 323.8
2 2 Felipe Massa 14:19:34 323.7
3 22 Lewis Hamilton 14:59:21 319.8
4 8 Kazuki Nakajima 14:05:00 317.1
5 23 Heikki Kovalainen 14:09:43 317.1
6 7 Nico Rosberg 14:20:02 316.1
7 10 Mark Webber 14:33:40 314.9
8 5 Fernando Alonso 14:55:15 314.9
9 12 Timo Glock 14:33:38 314.5
10 4 Robert Kubica 14:55:20 314.2
11 6 Nelsinho Piquet 14:20:20 314.1
12 9 David Coulthard 14:19:56 313.7
13 11 Jarno Trulli 14:33:33 313.7
14 3 Nick Heidfeld 15:00:43 312.5
15 14 Sebastien Bourdais 14:19:46 311.3
16 17 Rubens Barrichello 14:35:14 311.0
17 15 Sebastian Vettel 14:33:26 310.9
18 21 Giancarlo Fisichella 14:18:21 310.7
19 20 Adrian Sutil 14:05:11 310.5
20 16 Jenson Button 14:34:12 309.7

of course you can always compare apples with bananas and make a snapshot of one particular lap. but what would that mean?

Hummmm, if everything is already SO optimized, how can they improve 25HP just by changing oil type? I'd rather think the whole package is so optimized that they manage to reduce aerodynamic drag and improve mechanical grip.

BTW, is transmission development frozen as well?