Re: 2025/2026 Hybrid Powerunit speculation
Posted: 03 Aug 2021, 10:35
Why standardizing the MGU-H instead of banning?
Because the MGU-H is the biggest contributor to the high thermal efficiency of these engines
Because current MGU-H supplies 70-80% of the ERS energy. Without MGU-H the ERS would be just a heavy ineffective system, like KERS was. Also most manufacturers are heavy into electric drivelines, so a more powerful MGU-K would be logical, which needs even more energy. Even if they would add front axle brake energy recovery, MGU-H is needed for total energy supply.
in case there's anyone who hasn't noticed .....NL_Fer wrote: ↑04 Aug 2021, 08:40Because current MGU-H supplies 70-80% of the ERS energy. Without MGU-H the ERS would be just a heavy ineffective system, like KERS was. Also most manufacturers are heavy into electric drivelines, so a more powerful MGU-K would be logical, which needs even more energy. Even if they would add front axle brake energy recovery, MGU-H is needed for total energy supply.
Well… If they, in this case, choose the Magnetti Martelli H motor shown in 2013 as a standerd part, there wouldn’t have been a spilt turbo solution and at the moment, in consumer products, the split turbo is the only one for sale in an actual car. There is no MM on any car out there.
Cost is the most important factor. And hydrogen usage is inherently wasteful. It would probably be more viable to put batteries under the trailers as well, beside the truck.wuzak wrote: ↑03 Aug 2021, 10:30Depends on what type of vehicle.
In cars, maybe not. But long haul trucks, where payload is the most important factor.
Recently a Hyundai Nexo fuel cell SUV broke the world record for distance traveled, just shy of 900km using just over 6kg of hydrogen.
The Nexo weighs 1,800kg, roughly the same as an equivalent petrol model, lighter than a BEV.
The official range is ~666km/414 miles.
And what if by doing so you halved the payload?mzso wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 15:33Cost is the most important factor. And hydrogen usage is inherently wasteful. It would probably be more viable to put batteries under the trailers as well, beside the truck.wuzak wrote: ↑03 Aug 2021, 10:30Depends on what type of vehicle.
In cars, maybe not. But long haul trucks, where payload is the most important factor.
Recently a Hyundai Nexo fuel cell SUV broke the world record for distance traveled, just shy of 900km using just over 6kg of hydrogen.
The Nexo weighs 1,800kg, roughly the same as an equivalent petrol model, lighter than a BEV.
The official range is ~666km/414 miles.
A co-developed, mass-market MGUH produced and used by the teams would be best. Then they can all offer in road cars and make more money/lower emissions. How is this NOT a great idea?Jolle wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 15:03Well… If they, in this case, choose the Magnetti Martelli H motor shown in 2013 as a standerd part, there wouldn’t have been a spilt turbo solution and at the moment, in consumer products, the split turbo is the only one for sale in an actual car. There is no MM on any car out there.
The different commercial parties that would be interested in the real life application of a turbine driven recovery system could learn a lot from F1, companies like Bosch or Valeo. A standerd, sturdy, safe spec part, would hamper innovation.
This goes in my opinion for the several components that are new in this PU, where commercial use is possible. Battery tech, control electronics and where we see more use already: combustion chamber design and lean burn injection.
Zynerji wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 17:33A co-developed, mass-market MGUH produced and used by the teams would be best. Then they can all offer in road cars and make more money/lower emissions. How is this NOT a great idea?Jolle wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 15:03Well… If they, in this case, choose the Magnetti Martelli H motor shown in 2013 as a standerd part, there wouldn’t have been a spilt turbo solution and at the moment, in consumer products, the split turbo is the only one for sale in an actual car. There is no MM on any car out there.
The different commercial parties that would be interested in the real life application of a turbine driven recovery system could learn a lot from F1, companies like Bosch or Valeo. A standerd, sturdy, safe spec part, would hamper innovation.
This goes in my opinion for the several components that are new in this PU, where commercial use is possible. Battery tech, control electronics and where we see more use already: combustion chamber design and lean burn injection.
For a commodity item that is mass produced? I mean, all cars have blower-motors already... Why would 1 more electric motor be much more expensive?FW17 wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 19:16Zynerji wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 17:33A co-developed, mass-market MGUH produced and used by the teams would be best. Then they can all offer in road cars and make more money/lower emissions. How is this NOT a great idea?Jolle wrote: ↑05 Aug 2021, 15:03
Well… If they, in this case, choose the Magnetti Martelli H motor shown in 2013 as a standerd part, there wouldn’t have been a spilt turbo solution and at the moment, in consumer products, the split turbo is the only one for sale in an actual car. There is no MM on any car out there.
The different commercial parties that would be interested in the real life application of a turbine driven recovery system could learn a lot from F1, companies like Bosch or Valeo. A standerd, sturdy, safe spec part, would hamper innovation.
This goes in my opinion for the several components that are new in this PU, where commercial use is possible. Battery tech, control electronics and where we see more use already: combustion chamber design and lean burn injection.
How much gas can it save when fitted to a golf? Can the owner recoupe the additional cost through his period of ownership of 4 year?
about a million reasons