Did F1 need a greener engine formula?

[bhall]

The problem is F1 regulation is too stringent. This is the biggest stumbling block for any innovation to be going from track to road.

Look at the early 90s. Active suspension etc etc...there was technology available for which rules had yet to be written. And, some of it found its way onto the road.

Also a great point. You cannot encourage "green" innovation by clamping down on innovation.

[FoxHound]

Why level inefficiency of air freight to F1? A purely electric or solar powered race car would still have this inefficiency if it was going to be a global series.

It is ridiculous in my opinion, to level this at F1.

Surely if this is the case all teams should have a factory outside silverstone, and they should use horse drawn carts to take the cars to the race track.

The point here is that each car uses 60kgs of fuel less than before per race. 22 cars means around 1300kgs a race is saved, meaning 25 tonnes less fuel is consumed or needed for a season in F1. This is not inconsiderable.

Its a rough figure as of course I haven't taken into account the 60/90 laps each car will do in free practice.
Nor have I accounted for any retirements.

[FoxHound]

Enchante bhal

[TheGkbrk]

You can look at this from many perspectives.
First is that F1 is going to be more helpful to the car industry with all the energy recovery systems and its approach to be more fuel efficient. Also with less powerful engines and fuel restrictions the sport is becoming green.
It is all looking positive.

Or you can think:
We now have 1.6 liter F1 engines that sound very silent. What is the point of having an F1 engine that doesn't sound powerful and special? Why would you want to limit the fuel and prevent the cars from pushing to the limit and giving it the max speed they have? Why make the cars heavier and slow them? And questions like these.

Or you can say that rule and regulation changes in sports are inevitable. This is just one of them and it just needs time to get used to.

Personally I am closer to the second opinion but still ok with the changes. I will be actually happy if this new F1 ends the domination that we have seen in recent years and bring the F1 we all want.
F1 should keep shining.

[el-Magico]

Why level inefficiency of air freight to F1? A purely electric or solar powered race car would still have this inefficiency if it was going to be a global series.

+1 you are right about that, but still... why evening races with all these lights instead of using the free sunlight during the day? Probably it is for the show.. but than we could also use that same argument for engine sound and fuel consumption.. because it is better for the show if we have engines doing 21.000rpm..

[thedutchguy]

The point here is that each car uses 60kgs of fuel less than before per race. 22 cars means around 1300kgs a race is saved, meaning 25 tonnes less fuel is consumed or needed for a season in F1. This is not inconsiderable.

And how many kgs of fuel and kiloWatts of electricity do you think have been used during the development of these engines? And how many Lithium Ion battery cells have been used so far during the development, and will be used in the coming years?

I'ts like Tim.Wright said: F1 doesn't care about being green, it cares about looking green. If F1 truly cared about being green it wouldn't keep expanding into countries where people don't care for motor racing, far from the teams European headquarters. There wouldn't be night races and much more restrictions should be placed on the tonnage of freight teams can take with them. 1300 kilos of fuel a year is a joke compared to what could be saved with such measures.

[Tim.Wright]

Why level inefficiency of air freight to F1? A purely electric or solar powered race car would still have this inefficiency if it was going to be a global series.

+1 you are right about that, but still... why evening races with all these lights instead of using the free sunlight during the day? Probably it is for the show.. but than we could also use that same argument for engine sound and fuel consumption.. because it is better for the show if we have engines doing 21.000rpm..

You really wondering why races are held at night? It's to align the race broadcast times to maximise the TV viewers in the main european markets. Its win-win for F1, they get more viewers so they can raise the hosting fee while the circuit owners cop the energy costs for the lights.

[langwadt]

What you're describing is a form of conservatism centred on a very specific vision of F1; namely as entertainment with no other considerations. I personally don't believe it has ever been like that. Commercial and social pressures are real.

I'm not conservative for the heck of it. I like innovation, also in cars. I think the Tesla Model S is one of the coolest cars around. But indeed, I think F1 should entertain and be as awesome an experience as it can be for the spectators.

And yes, I do think that conserving 22 (cars) x 60 (liters) for a race is utterly pointless if that race involves all the energy usage (or waste if you like) I mentioned before. Most of all since F1 seems to get more global all the time, which not only means more cargo to be shipped around the world with the fleet of jumbo jets, but also more night races which are run under artificial lighting which consumes huge amounts of energy.

not to mention the power needed to power 30 million TVs, but that is not the point.
The point is if you can get some of the worlds best engineers with almost unlimited budgets to work on efficiency
because that is what it takes to win, it might help make all the cars in the world a bit more efficient.

[FoxHound]

Why stop at the lighting for a night race?

Why stop at F1?

People are looking into this far too deeply. If F1 is going to be castigated for using night race lighting, for 1 or 2 races I might add, then you can also level this at football, rugby, cricket, baseball etc etc until you are left playing billiards at candle light.

The problem is the cars where viewed as dinosaurs. It was a good move to at least attempt to appease the green lobby at making an effort to extract more from a litre of fuel they use to race.

But when people start talking about plane transportation and adding this as an issue f1 needs to rectify? Well then so does every global sport in the world.

[Lycoming]

The point is if you can get some of the worlds best engineers with almost unlimited budgets to work on efficiency
because that is what it takes to win, it might help make all the cars in the world a bit more efficient.

So like... WEC?

Even there, with production minimums and such, it's not that much better in terms of road relevance.

[Sulman]

Why stop at the lighting for a night race?

Why stop at F1?

People are looking into this far too deeply. If F1 is going to be castigated for using night race lighting, for 1 or 2 races I might add, then you can also level this at football, rugby, cricket, baseball etc etc until you are left playing billiards at candle light.

The problem is the cars where viewed as dinosaurs. It was a good move to at least attempt to appease the green lobby at making an effort to extract more from a litre of fuel they use to race.

But when people start talking about plane transportation and adding this as an issue f1 needs to rectify? Well then so does every global sport in the world.

I believe none of this would be even questioned if the engines made more noise. I'm therefore not convinced of the sincerity of a lot of the arguments, but I'm always glad to read different points of view.

[el-Magico]

Football, rugby, cricket, baseball don't pretend to be green, are they?
And are single turbo engines not dinosaurs? A TriTurbo would be more revolutionary.. Or QuadTurbo, even more bizar

[FoxHound]

So because the other sports dont pretend to be green that absolves them?

Ostrich. Head. Sand.

[thedutchguy]

I believe none of this would be even questioned if the engines made more noise. I'm therefore not convinced of the sincerity of a lot of the arguments, but I'm always glad to read different points of view.

You're right. Like I said before, I'm not against innovation. F1 at the leading edge of technology is fine with me, but as long as it's used to serve F1, not to sell an image.

My beef with the current regulations is not that F1 portrays a green image (true or not), but that in doing so it takes away the excitement that I think should go with F1, both in sound and speed. It's bizar to me that F1 has willingly entered an era where engines sound like crap and drivers need to lift and coast during races to make it to the end. Even the 24 hours of Le Mans is basically a 24 hour sprint race these days, but a 90 minute F1 race must be so 'green' that drivers need to drive five seconds below their ultimate pace to make it to the end? Ridiculous.

[FoxHound]

I share the frustration of fuel saving. But its nothing new.