Concept power units from 2030

[ENGINE TUNER]

Also, the same mass of battery, 25kg, was used for kers as it is for the current PU.

I couldn't find any refernce to a weight limit for the 2009-2013 KERS battery.

But it is doubtful that a battery of 300kJ storage weighed the same as one with 4MJ.

Yes, I was shocked as well but total KERS mass was approx 30kg(most of which was the battery). And current regulations stipulate minimum 20kg for the energy store, maximum 25kg. It was Mercedes who revealed that the ES for both systems were approximately the same mass, for them. Amazing progress.

[toraabe]

Supercharged two stroke engine, direct injection with mgu h and k. 1.5 litre v6

[DenBommer]

Supercharged two stroke engine, direct injection with mgu h and k. 1.5 litre v6

Well, the two-stroke engine has come up before. But back then, people were talking about opposing pistons. I don’t see that happening anytime soon because that would mean switching to a completely different type of engine, just because of the two-stroke alone.

https://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/ ... e-engines/

[DenBommer]

If one were hypothetically to place an MGU-K on the front wheels for 2026.

What impact would this have on the dimensions of the nose?

How much additional weight would it add?

[wuzak]

If one were hypothetically to place an MGU-K on the front wheels for 2026.

What impact would this have on the dimensions of the nose?

How much additional weight would it add?

350kW MGU for rear wheels is 16kg plus 4kg for gearbox.

I would assume that a front MGU would need to be at least as powerful as the rear one, it would also need some sort of differential and driveshafts.

[DenBommer]

If one were hypothetically to place an MGU-K on the front wheels for 2026.

What impact would this have on the dimensions of the nose?

How much additional weight would it add?

350kW MGU for rear wheels is 16kg plus 4kg for gearbox.

I would assume that a front MGU would need to be at least as powerful as the rear one, it would also need some sort of differential and driveshafts.

And using an axial flux motor? I still find it a pity that there is no energy recovery at the front wheels for 2026

[wuzak]

If one were hypothetically to place an MGU-K on the front wheels for 2026.

What impact would this have on the dimensions of the nose?

How much additional weight would it add?

350kW MGU for rear wheels is 16kg plus 4kg for gearbox.

I would assume that a front MGU would need to be at least as powerful as the rear one, it would also need some sort of differential and driveshafts.

And using an axial flux motor? I still find it a pity that there is no energy recovery at the front wheels for 2026

Not sure.

What power/weight would be expected, and how big would they be?

[ENGINE TUNER]

If one were hypothetically to place an MGU-K on the front wheels for 2026.

What impact would this have on the dimensions of the nose?

How much additional weight would it add?

Current mguk is 7kg and about the size of a typical starter on a saloon car. I believe it is 160hp. Maybe look into the spec mguk at the front of the current Formula E car. Its addition has transformed the racing in that series and taken the performance up several notches.

[DenBommer]

350kW MGU for rear wheels is 16kg plus 4kg for gearbox.

I would assume that a front MGU would need to be at least as powerful as the rear one, it would also need some sort of differential and driveshafts.

And using an axial flux motor? I still find it a pity that there is no energy recovery at the front wheels for 2026

Not sure.

What power/weight would be expected, and how big would they be?

This article is mainly about axial flux motors for airplanes. However, they already have a 300 hp motor weighing only 8.3 kg. So I assume this is also possible for cars, especially for sports cars and F1 cars.

https://newatlas.com/aircraft/evolito-a ... ft-motors/

[mzso]

Supercharged two stroke engine, direct injection with mgu h and k. 1.5 litre v6

Unless the supercharging is done via a turbo, it's a waste of energy. So, unlikely to ever happen.

[DenBommer]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... -2026/amp/

[organic]

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... -2026/amp/

There were discussions in F1 to keep the current rules for 2 more years and switch straight to V10s in 2028. Another idea: Keep the 2026 regs for only 3 instead of 5 years before the V10 switch. FIA already set up a V10 working group.

The Formula 1 community has been discussing a contingency plan for the future for weeks. It sounds like a crazy idea, but it's increasingly taking on a serious meaning. The current regulations are to be extended by two years, with the goal of switching directly to cheaper V10 engines powered by climate-neutral fuel. This would be a complete reversal of Formula 1's plans to make the sport even more attractive to car companies.

The starting point was Formula 1 boss Stefano Domenicali's praise of the V10 engine. Powered by climate-neutral fuel, it would be a solution for the premier class, Domenicali thought aloud. It is cheaper and simpler than current powertrains and also than the hybrid drive system planned for 2026. It allows for smaller and lighter cars.

What initially sounded like a pipe dream suddenly gained momentum. F1 management has other reasons to fear next year's major rule reform. It could jeopardize the balance in the field and thus the excitement. With new cars, new engines, new tires, and the great unknown of e-fuels, there's a great danger that one driver will interpret the new rules better than everyone else and then pull off a show.

Already during the tests in Bahrain, heated discussions about the theoretical models continued in Melbourne. Neither Formula 1 nor the FIA ​​has made a clear statement about the direction the premier class will take. They are waiting to see how the situation develops and which camp exerts more pressure.

Because a continuation of the existing regulations is impractical and enforcement would threaten lawsuits from the aggrieved parties, an alternative plan is also under discussion. According to this, the 2026 engine regulations would only apply for three years instead of five. The FIA ​​statutes allow this.

[mzso]

Because a continuation of the existing regulations is impractical and enforcement would threaten lawsuits from the aggrieved parties, an alternative plan is also under discussion. According to this, the 2026 engine regulations would only apply for three years instead of five. The FIA ​​statutes allow this.

Threaten? More like guarantee... They spent billions developing it. They won't just flush that down the drain.

Does any know if the FIA actually has a regulatory basis to shorten the engine regs to three years? Or whether it's just a delusion of the article writer.

As for the technical aspect it seems braindead. Would they be willing to double the fuel capacity for the dinosaur v10s? It would rather take a dump on their whole PR/marketing for the past 15 years or so.

If they wanted to save weight and still have modern engines they could go to small sized turbo engines with an MGU-H and a tiny storage. I'm thinking something like V4 as per the original idea of 15 years ago. (Or rotary, or something other radical) And only allow electric motors of the highest power density. I'm thinking of replacing rear brakes with a similar weight. Axial flux motors can be really power-dense.

(I also think much of the weight is due to bloated chassis'. So chop the length down to 4,5m. Also crude prescribed crash structured, which could be replaced by crash tests, and team optimized crash structures.)