F1technical.net

Anything in that bbc article thatwasn't in quotes i will take with a pinch of salt. 50% increase in engine efficiency is madness.
Even if it was the whole package, those kinds of increases only happen with turbine power plants; with countless cycles feeding of the main power.

I'll expect maybe 10% to 15% in the best case. This is with loads of equipment bringing the cars hundreds of kg overweight that defeat the purpose of saving fuel in the first place.

ringo wrote:Anything in that bbc article thatwasn't in quotes i will take with a pinch of salt. 50% increase in engine efficiency is madness.

Andrew Benson obviously is a bit of a clueless type. He mixes fuel consumption and efficiency figures. He also seems to have no idea what turbo compounding means. If you know what was being discussed you understand what they have decided.

WhiteBlue wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsp ... 255871.stm

F1 ENGINE RULES FROM 2013

• 1.6-litre, inline four-cylinder turbos with energy recovery
• Fuel mass flow restrictions and total fuel cap
• Fuel efficiency to increase by a target of 50%
• Overall power to remain same at approx 750bhp
• Checks and balances to ensure costs are contained and performance across all engines remains comparable
• Plan for advanced turbo compounding to be introduced in subsequent years
• Power of Kers energy recovery systems to increase from 60kw in 2011 to 120kw in 2013

I didn't notice a mention of the cylinder layout in that article. Has an inline arrangement been confirmed elsewhere?

Great thread, btw, thanks all. One of the best active threads over the past few months. Lots of good predictions.

Formula None wrote:I didn't notice a mention of the cylinder layout in that article. Has an inline arrangement been confirmed elsewhere?

This post quotes the first tweat by ScarbsF1 who kicked off the discussion.

I also think that it has been an extremely interesting discussion so far. Many earlier concepts did not work out exactly as we thought. I thought that they would not impose really useful fuel flow restrictions. Therefore I thought only total fuel caps would do it. Others thought that only flow limits would work but they predicted much higher limits than the one we are talking now. In the end there seems to be a useful compromise which is supported by all the main players.

I must say that I'm impressed by Jean Todt. He did a very good job pushing this through without massive conflict and confrontation. He has proved to be a worthy successor to Max Mosley and he gets things done without pushing F1 to the brink of collaps. I pull my hat to the guy.

This isn't official yet right? I think i heard the rules will be official on friday...

For once i think bernie is right in trying to stop this engine reduction and herbivore trend in formula 1. I just cant see anyone benefiting from this new reduced and controlled formula, at least they should be able to burn as much fuel as they want. If you tell people that formula 1 now runs 4 cylinder turbo's people will automatically respond "..wow i bet they are very efficient.." thats when berine says yes*(with the asterisk of course)

Sure good quality leaves and grass are expensive to grow, but would you really eat a salad with water over a juicy, manly steak and a glass of red Bordeaux?

With due respect to F1T's most elder and prominent members, I have a gut-feel that this is all show to mark ambition and not much more, when engine manufacturers involved, xcept Renault which lags 50+ Hp to Merc, likes it just the way it is?

xpensive wrote:With due respect to F1T's most elder and prominent members, I have a gut-feel that this is all show to mark ambition and not much more, when engine manufacturers involved, xcept Renault which lags 50+ Hp to Merc, likes it just the way it is?

Couldn't agree more.

How can this be all show if we are witnessing the biggest and most fundamental rethink of the formula in the history of the sport? This will not be known as the 1.6L Formula but as the 100kg/h formula.

For the first time Formula1 is giving itself a constitution that is sustainable and setting the right incentives to the competitors. As a result legislators will not to change any mechanical details about the formula if power goes out of hand again. They can simply reduce the allowable fuel flow limit accordingly. Whatever the competitors wish to use in terms of mechanical design can be allowed as long as it meets the fuel flow requirement.

I think it is a very elegant solution. If this solution had been decided in 2007 for 2010 I think we would still have a lot of manufacturers on board that left F1. At least BMW could still be here. Their slogan efficient dynamics is embodied in the new formula. Finally F1 still strives for power but gives the highest reward to those who do this with the least amount of natural resources. For me this new formula is an unprecedented break through and very welcome.

In principle a fuel-flow-limit only sounds really good... just what F1 needs in today's "green" world.

My only worry is that the FIA will mandate bore size, valve size, etc -to reduce the requirement for all engine suppliers to individually research the ideal solution only to arrive at the same end point (i.e. to constrain costs that would otherwise be huge)... I don't think we'll see free developement of the absolute best solution... which will be a shame.....

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topi ... &mid=44869

if it will go so far as changes in regulations S1, I think that my experience with new4stroke could take into account. Especially that I do not deviate much from the above proposals.

6 cylinder at line.
1000 ccm intake bacground.
No turbo.
Possible diesels.

Provides that such an engine would have 750 bhp at 20 000 RPM

That would certainly enough to sustain the attractiveness of F1, and an excellent engine technology development

Regards Andrew Feliks

WhiteBlue wrote:At least BMW could still be here.

In 2008 BMW thrown away real chance of getting the crown and, at least for me, shown they do not understand yet what the sport is about.

Personally I would prefer to see in F1 teams showing fighting spirit. I understand they use racing as a marketing tool, but I would like they use the technology to make the show and not the eco contest.

And I would like the rules to be shaped with the entertainment in mind.

Btw, last week I was told by one of the F1 supplier (close to FIA) we can expect 15 teams on the grid soon. Maybe just a gossip but… who knows.

xpensive wrote:With due respect to F1T's most elder and prominent members, I have a gut-feel that this is all show to mark ambition and not much more, when engine manufacturers involved, xcept Renault which lags 50+ Hp to Merc, likes it just the way it is?

Almost probably. Given that some engine manufacturers don't want to change because they have a perceived 'locked in' advantage, and hid behind the guise of "It's too expensive", I wonder what has magically changed now?

I just cant see why they cant put a limit on engine development budget, say 30 million pounds... and then state that you have to make the end of the race with 160kg of fuel. end of story, you go home do your maths and in 2013 we have 3 or 4 types of engines and 12 different cars.
you could even have the manufactures publicly report engine horsepower, imagine that! and never install another engine freeze, and every time a manufacturer changes a component they have to re-publicize the hp figure.
This is what formula one should be all about, technology and engineering vs technology and engineering. Simple as that. There should be limits, but not limits on creativity, design and aerodynamics, but basic ground rules like max fuel for a race and your car must fit in a box x by y by z meters big.

A 30mil budget cap? How do u stop a team/manufacturer developing a new engine part for their le mans project which 'just happens' to fit perfectly on their f1 car?! I simply don't understand how a budget cap would work?

Anyone got an workable way of doing it?

hecti wrote:I just cant see why they cant put a limit on engine development budget, say 30 million pounds... and then state that you have to make the end of the race with 160kg of fuel. end of story, you go home do your maths and in 2013 we have 3 or 4 types of engines and 12 different cars.
you could even have the manufactures publicly report engine horsepower, imagine that! and never install another engine freeze, and every time a manufacturer changes a component they have to re-publicize the hp figure.
This is what formula one should be all about, technology and engineering vs technology and engineering. Simple as that. There should be limits, but not limits on creativity, design and aerodynamics, but basic ground rules like max fuel for a race and your car must fit in a box x by y by z meters big.

It takes a really long time to design all the components.. I think a freeze on the engine type but no limits on the boost and fuel is a better idea. no limits mechanical creativity engine wise will take more than just 2 years notice.