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.
Powershift wrote:Once again people, it is not a "Greener" engine formula, it is a more technologically advanced engine formula that just happens to focus on fuel efficiency.
No it's not. The entire message of the new regulations centers around smaller, more efficient engines which need to be road-relevant and more economical. Hell, the fact that they set a max amount of fuel and fuel flow limit says it all. The engine message is GREEN GREEN GREEN.
I dont think you will hear many complaints from Mercedes about the new power units in F1.
The promotional value for their road cars and those from McLaren are immense.
Road going super cars are already showing that those with hybrid power units are potentially much faster than ICE only.
Ferrari (and Macca) have an even bigger reason to support the new formula and use spin off tech in their road cars.
The public would soon vilify the fuel waste, pollution and noise from their cars in Towns and Cities if they continued to use just ICE power.
It is only Renault (and Red Bull, who only sell sugar water anyway) who have reasons to complain and that is mainly because they seem to only be able to get results this year by cheating.
Renault do have hybrid sales to consider however and need to rapidly up their game.
Hybrid and electric is the future for many many reasons, get used to it.
autogyro wrote:
Hybrid and electric is the future for many many reasons, get used to it.
Only if there is a huge investment in nuclear power. Charging all of those electric cars from the grid is going to need a more reliable energy source than wind turbines.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
autogyro wrote:
Hybrid and electric is the future for many many reasons, get used to it.
Only if there is a huge investment in nuclear power. Charging all of those electric cars from the grid is going to need a more reliable energy source than wind turbines.
Indeed, weather-dependent energy-sources like wind- and sun-power are possibly the most naive and infantile idea ever.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
autogyro wrote:
Hybrid and electric is the future for many many reasons, get used to it.
Only if there is a huge investment in nuclear power. Charging all of those electric cars from the grid is going to need a more reliable energy source than wind turbines.
Indeed, weather-dependent energy-sources like wind- and sun-power are possibly the most naive and infantile idea ever.
It takes 10 years of use for a sun-powered panel to recover the pollution originating from its production. Wind turbines are even less efficient in that regard. "Green" is nothing more then a marketing term.
Actually, the most eco-friendly way to generate energy is with nuclear power, given of course you take enough measures to keep the stuff inside the plant.
What a sight that would be: nuclear-powered f1 cars.
A windmill on land is about 2 MEUR per installed MW, but the average efficiency is only some 20% due to the power's cubic relation to windspeed, why a 1200 MW nuclear reactor would cost 12 GEUR to replace, but if there's no wind it at all doesn't help anyway.
"I spent most of my money on wine and women...I wasted the rest"
You guys have no idea how happy it makes me that people in here are questioning the virtue of this moronic formula.
If only the F1 media could be honest about this whole thing, would the sport have been better off possibly.
Forget the "green" marketing BS term, and let's just focus on efficiency. If F1 were really interested in seeing how efficiency as it pertains to engines could be improved, two things would have to be done in my opinion. The first would be to take away the engine development freeze. You cannot possibly make a more efficient engine if you opt to freeze the development, even in a piecemeal manner as the FIA is doing. That is the exact inverse of what auto manufacturers do. No matter how small the evolution of any auto manufacturers engine progresses, the fact is the engines do progress in terms of design, as well as efficiency over time. It is in their best interest to do this, because if they did not, their engines would stagnate, and not meet the consumer demands required - better fuel economy.
F1 opts to cut fuel usage by 30% via these shiny new power units, and then in their infinite wisdom, decides to freeze the engine development over time! Imagine how f*cking stupid you have to be to tout these supposed, increased efficiency engines, and then set the rules so they eventually become stagnant? The best part is the media and the fans eat up this "new and improved" F1 without even noticing how self-serving the entire thing is. I am starting to truly believe that in order to be in charge of the FIA, you have to attend a series of courses in order to become a highly functioning idiot...or maybe there is an implicit bargain made where you have to champion contradictory and asinine things in order to meet the best standards and practices of what the job of FIA President calls for.
If you are an auto manufacturer, why would you even get involved with this formula? Not only do you have to spend lots of money to design the engines, you don't even get to develop them.
Side note: Does anyone remember the last formula that actually had a ton of participation from auto manufacturers on the engine side of things? If you guessed the 3.5L formula of 1989-1994, you guessed correctly! Sadly I have no prizes to give out for this other than to commend you on a job well done.
This leads to me second point. Here's the trick for getting auto manufacturers involved...open the engine formula up completely. That's an easy sell to the boards because it is nothing more than a R&D opportunity put to practice in the best testing facility in existence - racing.
But the FIA deemed it worthy to make this new formula as unattractive as possible.
Oh I am sure a few esteemed posters are frantically pointing at the Honda entry for 2015 as a sign that this formula does really work.
I've no doubt that Honda's engine is nothing more than a destroked IndyCar engine with the recovery systems bolted on...sort of like what Cosworth used to do with all of their engines...stroke...destroke...and so on. After how badly Honda got burned with their last F1 experience, I'd be really, really, skeptical of why they are getting involved with this formula at all.
"I don't want to make friends with anybody. I don't give a sh*t for fame. I just want to win." -Nelson Piquet
Powershift wrote:Once again people, it is not a "Greener" engine formula, it is a more technologically advanced engine formula that just happens to focus on fuel efficiency.
I agree.
The old engine needed a refresh. This could have been an updated conventional ICE, but that would seem archaic in the context of current automotive technology. Otherwise it'd end up frozen in time like NASCAR's push-rod engines.
It was a no-brainer that the new engine had to be a hybrid. The current zeitgeist is for highly efficient propulsion, so F1 jumped on that bandwagon. Then the PR machine swung into action to say F1 is at the forefront of automotive technology. This conveniently forgets that F1 is mercenary, it follows fashion. Lets not kid ourselves that F1 sets the agenda for hyrbid technology even if the PR says the opposite. Equally, don't kid ourselves that F1 cares about energy us (look at the logistics), the faux green agenda it simply pandering to fashion.
It also happens to be a fiendishly complex engineering challenge that reinforces the "pinnacle of motorsport" illusion. Just don't let people know it is unnecessarily complex and completely contrived.
The Engine Manufacturers need the F1 to be relevant for their Brand/Products. And since the current trend goes towards Downsizing and Hybrid i would agree with richard_leeds that it was pretty much a no brainer.
Last edited by Thunder on 24 Mar 2014, 15:32, edited 1 time in total.
Rumours that the next Nissan GTR will have 250HP KERS seems to line up with where F1 is going in terms of energy recovery. Something I am glad to see because it might make it easier for me to get a job in the motor industry! (Physics Graduate)
Powershift wrote:Once again people, it is not a "Greener" engine formula, it is a more technologically advanced engine formula that just happens to focus on fuel efficiency.
I agree.
The old engine needed a refresh. This could have been an updated conventional ICE, but that would seem archaic in the context of current automotive technology. Otherwise it'd end up frozen in time like NASCAR's push-rod engines.
It was a no-brainer that the new engine had to be a hybrid. The current zeitgeist is for highly efficient propulsion, so F1 jumped on that bandwagon. Then the PR machine swung into action to say F1 is at the forefront of automotive technology. This conveniently forgets that F1 is mercenary, it follows fashion. Lets not kid ourselves that F1 sets the agenda for hyrbid technology even if the PR says the opposite. Equally, don't kid ourselves that F1 cares about energy us (look at the logistics), the faux green agenda it simply pandering to fashion.
It also happens to be a fiendishly complex engineering challenge that reinforces the "pinnacle of motorsport" illusion. Just don't let people know it is unnecessarily complex and completely contrived.
Here's the thing though Richard, NASCAR doesn't purport to be anything other than stock car racing aka spec racing, which is why their engine technology is excusable. If you notice too, they also don't have a problem like F1 in attracting sponsors of fielding a full grid of cars at every race in spite of their technological antiquity. NASCAR tends to get a bad rap from everyone, but there's even some lessons to be found in NASCAR...likely to the dismay of some.
But did you know that while they limit the size of the throttle body, they do not restrict the fuel flow?
"I don't want to make friends with anybody. I don't give a sh*t for fame. I just want to win." -Nelson Piquet
F1 prides itself on using complex technology (which is occasionally innovative ), so it has to keep moving forwards to match the image. In my mind the move to hybrid is no different to abandoning carburettors and manual gearboxes.
ps - I'm only talking about the motivation to move to hybrid. Whether this implementation of hyrbid technology is the right one is another matter.
richard_leeds wrote:If F1 stuck with a conventional ICE it would have risked
F1 prides itself on using complex technology (which is occasionally innovative ), so it has to keep moving forwards to match the image. In my mind the move to hybrid is no different to abandoning carburettors and manual gearboxes.
ps - I'm only talking about the motivation to move to hybrid. Whether this implementation of hyrbid technology is the right one is another matter.
I agree with that. My issue arises more out of F1 creating the illusion that they use complex technology. Hybrid systems are not even new since road cars had them beat long ago on that front. Even LMP1 beat them to the punch. What would have made more of a statement was if F1 had gone and pursued an altogether different avenue with regards to technology. It's why I make such a big deal about going to open engine development, and a set displacement. Allow refueling again because refueling will push engine efficiency in my opinion. Instead of just mimicking the competition, forge altogether new ground because I cannot figure out for whom this formula currently is aimed at.
"I don't want to make friends with anybody. I don't give a sh*t for fame. I just want to win." -Nelson Piquet
), so it has to keep moving forwards to match the image. In my mind the move to hybrid is no different to abandoning carburettors and manual gearboxes.