Concept power units from 2030

[mzso]

Folks here seem to believe that I get stuck on certain viewpoints, but that is not the case. I'm down for the jet-electric AWD, supercharged 1.5l i5 with VLIM/VLEM, or 2005 v10s with synth fuel.

As long as it's exciting and "crazy tech", I'm in!

But what's exciting or crazy about the last two?
Unless you include turbo charging than supercharging an I5 is just inferior. 2005 v10 is just dinosaur technology. And only ever even existed as they were because turbos were banned, fuel means no meaningful difference.

[DenBommer]

I still do believe hub motors have a future in F1.

Maybe not within 10/15 years.

We could have hub motors right now. It entirely depends of the arbitrary rules of the formula. If it would say you can have four motors, but only placed inside the rims then that is what we would have.
But seeing the attitudes around today, I don't see it happening.

Probably yes.

But after watching this video:

I've changed my mind again. Maybe in the future, it would be better to go back to simplicity and use a combustion engine with an electric motor. But just a very powerfull small-scale electric motor with a maximum size and light materials. I am sure that in this way they can also develop small, efficient, and powerful electric engines for street cars (EV’s)

If one were to recover energy only through the front wheels, would this weigh less than an engine that can also deploy?

[Zynerji]

Folks here seem to believe that I get stuck on certain viewpoints, but that is not the case. I'm down for the jet-electric AWD, supercharged 1.5l i5 with VLIM/VLEM, or 2005 v10s with synth fuel.

As long as it's exciting and "crazy tech", I'm in!

But what's exciting or crazy about the last two?
Unless you include turbo charging than supercharging an I5 is just inferior. 2005 v10 is just dinosaur technology. And only ever even existed as they were because turbos were banned, fuel means no meaningful difference.

Modern and updated V10 would obviously be better than the 2005 versions. And the i5 supercharged is specifically chosen because it sounds like a V10 where the turbo would ruin the sound.

Exciting and crazy tech can be very esoteric items IMHO. just a V10 TJI-type with lean burn tech would fit that for me, even tho everyone would be "Its just a V10"...

[mzso]

Folks here seem to believe that I get stuck on certain viewpoints, but that is not the case. I'm down for the jet-electric AWD, supercharged 1.5l i5 with VLIM/VLEM, or 2005 v10s with synth fuel.

As long as it's exciting and "crazy tech", I'm in!

But what's exciting or crazy about the last two?
Unless you include turbo charging than supercharging an I5 is just inferior. 2005 v10 is just dinosaur technology. And only ever even existed as they were because turbos were banned, fuel means no meaningful difference.

Modern and updated V10 would obviously be better than the 2005 versions. And the i5 supercharged is specifically chosen because it sounds like a V10 where the turbo would ruin the sound.

Exciting and crazy tech can be very esoteric items IMHO. just a V10 TJI-type with lean burn tech would fit that for me, even tho everyone would be "Its just a V10"...

Okay, so by "exciting" you mean shallow reasons, such as noise, instead of some technological curiosity.
V10-s would be better. How much better is a better question, probably not a lot if the rules are the same. They've been on that concept for like two decades. If a fuel limit similar to today's is introduced then you won't get the noise you covet. Because they would immediately go to lower revs and dropping cylinders, if allowed.

For me some technological curiosity would be interesting, exciting or "crazy". Which to me is either exotic ICE or a more forward looking electric.
Since most people want lighter cars, then the PU should be light as well. If it's ICE then ultra compact and light rotary's would be the way to go, with turbo charging probably, otherwise you just get ultra high revving guzzlers.
A more modern approach would be electric. If you going for maximum performance probably cryo-cooled superconducting ones. Otherwise there is still a was variety of things to try for motors. The power source can realistically only be some form of fuel cell because of weight.

[Zynerji]

But what's exciting or crazy about the last two?
Unless you include turbo charging than supercharging an I5 is just inferior. 2005 v10 is just dinosaur technology. And only ever even existed as they were because turbos were banned, fuel means no meaningful difference.

Modern and updated V10 would obviously be better than the 2005 versions. And the i5 supercharged is specifically chosen because it sounds like a V10 where the turbo would ruin the sound.

Exciting and crazy tech can be very esoteric items IMHO. just a V10 TJI-type with lean burn tech would fit that for me, even tho everyone would be "Its just a V10"...

Okay, so by "exciting" you mean shallow reasons, such as noise, instead of some technological curiosity.
V10-s would be better. How much better is a better question, probably not a lot if the rules are the same. They've been on that concept for like two decades. If a fuel limit similar to today's is introduced then you won't get the noise you covet. Because they would immediately go to lower revs and dropping cylinders, if allowed.

For me some technological curiosity would be interesting, exciting or "crazy". Which to me is either exotic ICE or a more forward looking electric.
Since most people want lighter cars, then the PU should be light as well. If it's ICE then ultra compact and light rotary's would be the way to go, with turbo charging probably, otherwise you just get ultra high revving guzzlers.
A more modern approach would be electric. If you going for maximum performance probably cryo-cooled superconducting ones. Otherwise there is still a was variety of things to try for motors. The power source can realistically only be some form of fuel cell because of weight.

F1 cannot ever be ALL ELECTRIC. FE has that FIA contract for 100 years.

With that being said, why would you seem to be so against a jet-electric drivetrain?

That would seen to tick all of your boxes...

[Rodak]

I don't think I've seen anyone suggest a turbo-compound motor, so I will! How about a turbo-compound engine?

[mzso]

F1 cannot ever be ALL ELECTRIC. FE has that FIA contract for 100 years.

With that being said, why would you seem to be so against a jet-electric drivetrain?

That would seen to tick all of your boxes...

Are you one of the few privileged to have read the contract, to be familiar with all the terms? Good for you. (I see numerous potential loopholes, for example if you add a minuscule 100g single use rocket "engine" to the car it's not 100% electric anymore.)

A "jet electric" drivetrain is unworkable on an F1 car scale. Maybe it doesn't work to a useful degree at all, since no-one is using jet engines to produce power at all.

[mzso]

I don't think I've seen anyone suggest a turbo-compound motor, so I will! How about a turbo-compound engine?

But that includes all turbocharged engines, doesn't it? So in what way do you imagine it?

[Zynerji]

F1 cannot ever be ALL ELECTRIC. FE has that FIA contract for 100 years.

With that being said, why would you seem to be so against a jet-electric drivetrain?

That would seen to tick all of your boxes...

Are you one of the few privileged to have read the contract, to be familiar with all the terms? Good for you. (I see numerous potential loopholes, for example if you add a minuscule 100g single use rocket "engine" to the car it's not 100% electric anymore.)

A "jet electric" drivetrain is unworkable on an F1 car scale. Maybe it doesn't work to a useful degree at all, since no-one is using jet engines to produce power at all.

From what i remember, the long term intent was to merge F1 and FE into a single series.

And I don't think anyone had 1.6L TJI turbo MGU-H/K engines before 2014 either, so that seems like a weird way to look at technology... Turbo MGU-H currently work. MGU-K also currently work. In tandem. So why would 2 of each NOT work when swapping out the combustion chamber?

That doesn't make much sense to me either...

[wuzak]

Since most people want lighter cars, then the PU should be light as well. If it's ICE then ultra compact and light rotary's would be the way to go, with turbo charging probably, otherwise you just get ultra high revving guzzlers.

Complains abou "ultra high revving guzzlers" and also promotes the rotary!

[gruntguru]

I don't think I've seen anyone suggest a turbo-compound motor, so I will! How about a turbo-compound engine?

Great idea. Oh wait, we've had turbo-compound engines for the last 12 seasons!

[Tommy Cookers]

or have your 4 MGs and the ICE with no gears
1000 rpm round Loew's hairpin

... ICE with no gears? That's impossible.

these said otherwise .....
c.1000 general-use diesel railway engines (the first diesel, later differentially-boosted ones) and
c.1000000 motorcycles (1900s-1920s 'belt-drive') and
c.10000000 mopeds 1940s-1970s (ie pre 'twist-and-go' aka Variomatic patent) ....

also ....
the F1 ICE rules compel an ICE torque/rpm relationship that (by capping MGU-K torque/rpm) helps out the electrical side
but these could be changed ie allowing M-K energy to be maxed at low road speed and ICE energy maxed at high road speed ....
eliminating the gears - and making the electric stuff do a real job
this of course helps the movement towards wheel MGs

[mzso]

Since most people want lighter cars, then the PU should be light as well. If it's ICE then ultra compact and light rotary's would be the way to go, with turbo charging probably, otherwise you just get ultra high revving guzzlers.

Complains abou "ultra high revving guzzlers" and also promotes the rotary!

Rotary's can be efficient. At least if Liquid Piston's claims are not a complete lie. Plus they don't need to be revved to oblivion, they just need an appropriate amount of displacement.
If they really can do six combustion events on two rotations that's even more of a reason not to rev obscenely high. I imagine they could make do with one or two rotary pistons.

[Zynerji]

Since most people want lighter cars, then the PU should be light as well. If it's ICE then ultra compact and light rotary's would be the way to go, with turbo charging probably, otherwise you just get ultra high revving guzzlers.

Complains abou "ultra high revving guzzlers" and also promotes the rotary!

Rotary's can be efficient. At least if Liquid Piston's claims are not a complete lie. Plus they don't need to be revved to oblivion, they just need an appropriate amount of displacement.
If they really can do six combustion events on two rotations that's even more of a reason not to rev obscenely high. I imagine they could make do with one or two rotary pistons.

I think RadMax is dead now, but would be better than rotary or liquid piston... (24 combustion events per rotation). I wonder if EDM machining would help this concept as well.

[Tommy Cookers]

who needs rotation ?
free-piston engines can now be had with output by linear generators