F1technical.net

Agerasia wrote:It's pretty much a 1 spec engine, built by different manufacturers. Isn't that what Bernie wanted in the first place?

xpensive wrote:

WhiteBlue wrote:

bhallg2k wrote:...A budget cap is just a futile attempt to turn back the clock, and it's silly...

What a convincing argument! Perhaps we can now switch back to the issue of the 1.6L V6 turbo engine formula which is supposed to be the issue of this tread.

I don't have a problem with the new 1.6 V6 turbo formula with fuel-flow limit, h*ll, I've been advocating that myself.

But what I do have a problem with is the detailed rules with vee-angle, cylinder spacing, turbo location and what not.
All that is likely to lead to zero engine-variety with the real competition be on the recovery systems, KERS and HERS?

Details soon on the new Honda f1 engine program V6 twin turbo for 2014 thanks.

freedom_honda wrote:So this popped up on the old official Honda F1 facebook page.

Details soon on the new Honda f1 engine program V6 twin turbo for 2014 thanks.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hp ... 6610_n.jpg

elmerfud wrote:121 pages?

Nando wrote:So... who do you think will create the superior engine for the first year?
...

V6 turbo only after 2014?
The small team also want to also postpone the introduction of six-cylinder turbos. The engine change is planned for 2014. But already seeping out circles from Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault by that development of the turbo V6 with direct injection and integrated hybrid drive is more expensive than expected. Since no upper limit for the engine lease from 2014 is set, the team feared that they incur additional costs.

Right now they pay eight million euros for 16 engines and a few test engines. For each additional test run for an extra special exhaust developments is cashed. When KERS leasing prices vary between two and five million euros. Teams like Sauber, Force India, Caterham, Williams, Marussia and HRT are already at the limit. Higher motor cost can accept and do not want. The V8 engines of the present they would continue to cost only eight million per year.

There are also technical problems. The new engines are planned 25 kilograms heavier than. So the cars were too slow. The regulations were fashioned in a certain lap time down. Engine performance, fuel consumption, weight and output follow a formula, which sets a lap time as the target. This may not exceed five seconds slower than the current values. If the parameter is now so much weight out of the ordinary, the equation is no longer correct.

Because of the planned consumption limit of 130 liters of petrol for a race distance, there is no correction factors. For the engine manufacturer, this is bad news. Should prevail, the teams, they have set their pre-development money into the sand.

agip wrote:Let the small teams run with the V8s, that would be nice!

agip wrote:Let the small teams run with the V8s, that would be nice!

xpensive wrote:

agip wrote:Let the small teams run with the V8s, that would be nice!

Keep the limit on fuel-flow, 27.8 g/s, and let them run whatever the want.