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.
Being 'green' isn't the only concern of F1 or its manufacturers, quite obviously. There's still a desire for it to be the fastest name in the game. And there's just no way to achieve that with full electric power while having 300km races at 5-6km tracks and all that.
But it's still a big enough concern for the sport in terms of attracting new entrants and engine manufacturers that it cant be ignored.
Sure there is, with several battery swaps, or fuel cells.
For a lot of the ICE era, F1 was a legit innovating force for advancements in power and efficiency.
But I dont think the same can be argued for electric batteries. It's certainly an additional impetus, but we've had extremely strong motivations to improve battery technologies regardless of electric cars for quite a while now.
Why would you think that. If experimental batteries would be allowed, large manufacturers and even the teams themselves could do a lot of developments if they want to win. F1 would be the best thing for battery tech.
I reckon the global market for motorsport is big enough for both Formula 1 and Formula E to exist. 10 years ago, Sir Richard Branson even say Formula E will be bigger than F1.
But that has yet to happen.
F1 has almost all the money, the rest are fighting over scraps.
Alright then... It's extremely insignificant in comparison to atmospheric greenhouse gas buildup. (Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I didn't read.)
Anyway, I like ICE cars, for the fun of shifting gears, the autonomy in terms of range and fuel, data protection and so on.
But the process energy transition and the emissions where they are polluting (I mean not Co2) and the filtering systems in the exhaust system, to have them on every car and not only in the coal or gas powerplant is totally inefficient.
And you put the pollution right at the height of children faces. Yeah it it pretty clean nowadays, but still. of course there is brake dust and tyre dust but that is not inherently linked to the propulsion system, So Electric cars make more sense in my opinion.
I think we should wait how the cars sound without MGU-H and the need for the ICE to generate Power during braking.
once in a while I tune in to this, I like both!
Finishing races is important, but racing is more important.
Wait a minute. v6 turbo's were already done 30 years before and it wasn't a step back right? There were new elements like hybrid and heat reocvery mixed in. In the same way, it goes without saying that any new NA V10 will have hybrid and new elements mixed in. But the main point of it all is to have a hair raising, peaky engine that's a mental work out just to keep it on the road.
Obviously the hybridization is the novelty. And turbo engines are superior to begin with.
But the main point of it all is to have a hair raising, peaky engine that's a mental work out just to keep it on the road.
That's good measure of inferiority. Not sure why you think V10s would be like that by the way. Especially if they have an MGU. The turbos of the 80s were the most challenging to drive engine-wise, with their sometimes massive lag.
This conversation is not about what is a superior technology for saving fuel or road relevance. I think you have failed to understand that.
Why would you think that. If experimental batteries would be allowed, large manufacturers and even the teams themselves could do a lot of developments if they want to win. F1 would be the best thing for battery tech.
It's just not the sort of thing that F1 teams have the specific motivations to push hard on that the much larger industry of cars and tech wouldn't be doing already. Better battery tech is kind of a huge driving force for improvements in electronics these days as a whole, and cars are just part of that.
I'm just saying F1 doesn't have any unique capabilities or motivations in this area that would help drive things forward meaningfully. Batteries also dont need to be track-tested. And specific battery tech also wouldn't affect any kind of packaging or chassis considerations, as all batteries are just effectively big slabs.
This conversation is not about what is a superior technology for saving fuel or road relevance. I think you have failed to understand that.
In the context of F1 you can't go around that.
I'm not going aound that.. My Key word is "Superior" for the said topics... Meaning they have to address them but they don't need the most superior tech to do it.
This is why the engines tech will be dialed back for 2026. They won't be as efficient at 2025. No MGUH. They have to compensate with chopping the downforce. And adding more battery. To get cheaper engines (arguably not cheaper but anyway) to attract teams. The spectacle will be worsened according to the drivers.
The NA V10 hybrid will have to fill the gaps while not compromising too much on costs.
