F1technical.net

wuzak wrote: ↑

19 Aug 2025, 02:33

The "extreme fuel saving technologies" used in F1 gave extra power, not better fuel saving.

That's the same thing. It's just a matter of choice to go with more power or less fuel weight. It seems more power is more fruitful.

Not sure what your ultimate point is? That the 919 is not F1 level? That was never in doubt. Could it have been more powerful with the same fuel flow/quantity? No idea. Don't what other limitations might have been imposed on LMP1 engines, I'm not really familiar with them. Or whether all that recovered electricity made the pursuit of more ICE power of little interest.

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... e_vignette

So after reading this, it’s not if the V8 comes back but rather when.

I do not know how reliable AMuS is.

His reasoning for going the route of a V8 is curious, as he states part of that is having one dedicated supplier for the gearbox and one for the hybrid aspect. What's the actual goal, other than the engine simply being lighter? You won't be getting much innovation out of a single supplier providing for an entire field (not incl. ICE).

wuzak wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2025, 10:18

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/fias ... alled-off/

It’s not that the V8 is completely banned when I read the article, but more that Audi and Honda want to wait until the complete cycle is finished in 2031. They don’t want to move earlier to a V8 in 2029/2030.

And some details are still about whether it will have a turbo or not, and what kind of hybrid element.

So the plans for the V8 are not gone.

DenBommer wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2025, 10:26

wuzak wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2025, 10:18

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/fias ... alled-off/

It’s not that the V8 is completely banned when I read the article, but more that Audi and Honda want to wait until the complete cycle is finished in 2031. They don’t want to move earlier to a V8 in 2029/2030.

And some details are still about whether it will have a turbo or not, and what kind of hybrid element.

So the plans for the V8 are not gone.

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

wuzak wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:28

DenBommer wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2025, 10:26

wuzak wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2025, 10:18

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/fias ... alled-off/

It’s not that the V8 is completely banned when I read the article, but more that Audi and Honda want to wait until the complete cycle is finished in 2031. They don’t want to move earlier to a V8 in 2029/2030.

And some details are still about whether it will have a turbo or not, and what kind of hybrid element.

So the plans for the V8 are not gone.

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

Maybe they can compromise: give the teams a NA V8 but also with front-axle regen and an MGU-K on the rear axle. That way Audi gets what they actually wanted in the first place, front-axle regen.

DenBommer wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:57

wuzak wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:28

DenBommer wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2025, 10:26

It’s not that the V8 is completely banned when I read the article, but more that Audi and Honda want to wait until the complete cycle is finished in 2031. They don’t want to move earlier to a V8 in 2029/2030.

And some details are still about whether it will have a turbo or not, and what kind of hybrid element.

So the plans for the V8 are not gone.

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

Maybe they can compromise: give the teams a NA V8 but also with front-axle regen and an MGU-K on the rear axle. That way Audi gets what they actually wanted in the first place, front-axle regen.

Did Audi want front axle regen?

They wanted turbo engine withut MGUH and large ERS.

wuzak wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2025, 13:30

DenBommer wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:57

wuzak wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:28

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

Maybe they can compromise: give the teams a NA V8 but also with front-axle regen and an MGU-K on the rear axle. That way Audi gets what they actually wanted in the first place, front-axle regen.

Did Audi want front axle regen?

They wanted turbo engine withut MGUH and large ERS.

Actually, I don’t know that, but maybe front-axle regen is something that could tip the balance for the NA V8, a sort of compromise.

DenBommer wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2025, 15:09

wuzak wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2025, 13:30

DenBommer wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:57

Maybe they can compromise: give the teams a NA V8 but also with front-axle regen and an MGU-K on the rear axle. That way Audi gets what they actually wanted in the first place, front-axle regen.

Did Audi want front axle regen?

They wanted turbo engine withut MGUH and large ERS.

Actually, I don’t know that, but maybe front-axle regen is something that could tip the balance for the NA V8, a sort of compromise.

I suspect the ERS will be of less importance for a future PU than the 2026 PU.

So, less need for front regen.

In any case, one of the goals for the future PU would be lighter weight, which front regen woudl work against.

wuzak wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:28

DenBommer wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2025, 10:26

wuzak wrote: ↑

06 Sep 2025, 10:18

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/fias ... alled-off/

It’s not that the V8 is completely banned when I read the article, but more that Audi and Honda want to wait until the complete cycle is finished in 2031. They don’t want to move earlier to a V8 in 2029/2030.

And some details are still about whether it will have a turbo or not, and what kind of hybrid element.

So the plans for the V8 are not gone.

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

I don’t think so!

Toyota which has been the only car manufacturer producing fully hybrid cars always uses NA engines along with batteries and CVTs! So I don’t think NA engines mean low efficiency…

Capturing exhaust gasses that will otherwise goes to waste and using them to benefit the engine will always increase engine efficiency.

McLarenHonda wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2025, 16:36

wuzak wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:28

DenBommer wrote: ↑

07 Sep 2025, 10:26

It’s not that the V8 is completely banned when I read the article, but more that Audi and Honda want to wait until the complete cycle is finished in 2031. They don’t want to move earlier to a V8 in 2029/2030.

And some details are still about whether it will have a turbo or not, and what kind of hybrid element.

So the plans for the V8 are not gone.

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

I don’t think so!

Toyota which has been the only car manufacturer producing fully hybrid cars always uses NA engines along with batteries and CVTs! So I don’t think NA engines mean low efficiency…

Maybe that’s why they don’t have one foot in F1 (I mean with Haas).

DenBommer wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2025, 18:02

McLarenHonda wrote: ↑

09 Sep 2025, 16:36

wuzak wrote: ↑

08 Sep 2025, 11:28

This supports your view

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/f1-ma ... /10757765/

Though Audi still saying they want a high efficiency hybrid engine.

High efficiency would, surely, rule out any N/A engine?

I don’t think so!

Toyota which has been the only car manufacturer producing fully hybrid cars always uses NA engines along with batteries and CVTs! So I don’t think NA engines mean low efficiency…

Maybe that’s why they don’t have one foot in F1 (I mean with Haas).

You have to differentiate between racing and road use. Yes, a charged induction system would increase efficiency, if it runs on nominal charge pressure. In racing that's the case probably 60-80% of the time. If you crawl through a city, you may never reach nominal charge pressure. Which means you're stuck with a engine that in most cases has a lower compression ratio than a NA-engine would have, which means in this scenario, the charged engine is less efficient. Also, the induction charging system adds weight and needs space. Which makes the car as a whole a tiny bit less efficient.
In road applications, it's not just the engine, it's the whole car as a system that determines how efficient it is.