F1technical.net

hello if you had to model and develop an engine which would you choose or which would be better the v10 or the v12 engine i would like to go with the v12 and be able to get the calculations to say as a result a power of 20.000 rpm or even 22000 rpm. is this possible or would it be possible any opinion?

I believe that RPM is a bit optimistic.

Maybe 17-18k is more reasonable.

IIRC. 20k wasnt seen until the Cosworth V8 of 2006.

Maybe if they knock off the cam shafts and have system such as a Koenigsegg Freevalve

In the 3.0l formula 1 era all engine manufacturers converged on the V10 configuration because they believed it was best as a ‘car package’. And that formula at that time resulted in a race to attain ever higher engine RPM, because it was the easiest and fastest way to extract maximum HP. But if car packaging is of no concern when designing the engine at a mandated capacity limit the more the number of cylinders (V12 against V10 chose) the bigger the cylinder count the easier to attain higher RPM,

FW17 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 07:13

.... if they knock off the cam shafts and have system such as a Koenigsegg Freevalve

that would lose rpm
imo

I can't remember where I read this, but isn't 10 some kind of sweet spot between small piston size yet low friction. A bit the same as with valves. Both 4 and 5 valves per cylinder have 68% of the bore area covered, and the only advantage of 5 is relative lower valve weight and equal valve size. Beyond 5 it gets worse. I think 10 cylinders is kind off the same story. Although above would matter more when you talk efficiency and not power.

Bandit1216 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 15:16

... Both 4 and 5 valves per cylinder have 68% of the bore area covered, and the only advantage of 5 is relative lower valve weight and equal valve size. Beyond 5 it gets worse....

well Yamaha chose 7 valves
(for their otherwise conventional GP motorcycle)

Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 15:58

Bandit1216 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 15:16

... Both 4 and 5 valves per cylinder have 68% of the bore area covered, and the only advantage of 5 is relative lower valve weight and equal valve size. Beyond 5 it gets worse....

well Yamaha chose 7 valves
(for their otherwise conventional GP motorcycle)

That was like, 50 years ago? Even the NR is more recent… and more interesting. Yamaha and later Ferrari used 5 valves, but in the end realised that 4 offers the best performance and efficiency (both at prototypes without regulated amount of valves and street use)

I've checked some data of the engines the company I work for makes. We have relative new one with V engines in a brought range, all have Quad sequential turbo's except for the V8 which has 2 (sequential)

Although they are a little bigger and run on diesel or HFO it might give some data? The specific fuel consumption does not differ between V8, V10, V12, V14 or V16 of the same engine type. That would imply there no difference in losses between the configs.

Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 11:25

FW17 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 07:13

.... if they knock off the cam shafts and have system such as a Koenigsegg Freevalve

that would lose rpm
imo

+1

They can't open and close fast enough. Camshafts are REALLLY hard to beat.

5 valve chambers are a mess combustion wise and they struggle with getting good port velocity out of them.

IIRC. 20k wasnt seen until the Cosworth V8 of 2006.

This and they were at the limit of combustion speed with that bore size, and it wasn't the fastest engine of that era.

Hoffman900 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 17:34

Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 11:25

FW17 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 07:13

.... if they knock off the cam shafts and have system such as a Koenigsegg Freevalve

that would lose rpm
imo

+1

They can't open and close fast enough. Camshafts are REALLLY hard to beat.

5 valve chambers are a mess combustion wise and they struggle with getting good port velocity out of them.

IIRC. 20k wasnt seen until the Cosworth V8 of 2006.

This and they were at the limit of combustion speed with that bore size, and it wasn't the fastest engine of that era.

I'd like to see that Honda auto ignite system on their old V8...

Zynerji wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 18:05

Hoffman900 wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 17:34

Tommy Cookers wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 11:25

that would lose rpm
imo

+1

They can't open and close fast enough. Camshafts are REALLLY hard to beat.

5 valve chambers are a mess combustion wise and they struggle with getting good port velocity out of them.

IIRC. 20k wasnt seen until the Cosworth V8 of 2006.

This and they were at the limit of combustion speed with that bore size, and it wasn't the fastest engine of that era.

I'd like to see that Honda auto ignite system on their old V8...

I’d like to see it on a naturally aspirated application as well, assuming it can work that fast.

so could the v10 get more rpm than the v12 or would it be easier?

A V10 and a V12 cylinder engine of the same cubic capacity, The V12 will always be able to be made to rev higher then the V10.

saviour stivala wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2022, 19:05

A V10 and a V12 cylinder engine of the same cubic capacity, The V12 will always be able to be made to rev higher then the V10.

Would you quantify that please? One would think that more parts =more weight and friction. I'd love more info on it.