Life after the engine freeze...

[donskar]

Four cylinder F1? I hope not.

Rotaries might be interesting but could introduce equivalency issues.

Not opposed to diesels, but somehow a diesel F1 with the prancing horse on the side just is not right.

I can close my eyes and hear a 2.4 liter V12. As Max would say, it hurts so nice.

[donskar]

Scotracer, I hope you're right:

What I hope is that the teams have done some development of the V8s (but not been able to put it on the cars) over the freeze in anticipation of the regulations being opened up again with the same unit and we see a massive jump in power

However, I seem to recall several references to cutbacks in F1 engine departments because of the freeze. Anyone else have any input on that point?

[WhiteBlue]

Rotary engines are not well known for fuel efficiency. Efficiency will be the big drive by the FIA. The manufacturer teams will go for something that will benefit their road car development to justify the cost of a new formula. If you disregard the high manufacturing cost of the current engines you can simply tune them lower and lower in the rev limit to compensate for gains in regeneration. It would certainly be a cheap solution for many years in terms of engine development cost. I could imagine that they go for small, efficient and light engine which can be regenerated and used all season if they plunge into a new formula.

[f1italia]

Four cylinder F1? I hope not.

Rotaries might be interesting but could introduce equivalency issues.

Not opposed to diesels, but somehow a diesel F1 with the prancing horse on the side just is not right.

I can close my eyes and hear a 2.4 liter V12. As Max would say, it hurts so nice.

I like the idea of having diesels in F1. It would be more fuel efficient and It worked for Audi. BMW and Mercedes would have a big advantage.

[dumrick]

"The total amount of fuel energy to be consumed during a race will be regulated

I just wished that would be the full engine regulations chapter...

[rjsa]

"The total amount of fuel energy to be consumed during a race will be regulated

I just wished that would be the full engine regulations chapter...

=D>

[Conceptual]

Pat Symonds said that the current "frozen" engine is a VERY expensive piece to manufacture, so just turning down the revs doesn't really save any money, unless the engines are made to last 4-5 races...

But anyways, I know that the rotary isn't as efficient as of yet, but that is the point to bringing them into F1. The money that would be used to develop them would more than likely overcome that obstacle, and last I checked, a rotary can run on gas or diesel with a simple injector change, so that alone may increase the efficiency.

Chris

[Scotracer]

Pat Symonds said that the current "frozen" engine is a VERY expensive piece to manufacture, so just turning down the revs doesn't really save any money, unless the engines are made to last 4-5 races...

But anyways, I know that the rotary isn't as efficient as of yet, but that is the point to bringing them into F1. The money that would be used to develop them would more than likely overcome that obstacle, and last I checked, a rotary can run on gas or diesel with a simple injector change, so that alone may increase the efficiency.

Chris

By design, the V8s are no less complex nor expensive than the V10s they replaced. So, the FIAs motive was not cost cutting it must have been performance limiting. Still, lap times are very comparable to the V10 days so we shouldn't fuss too much (this year laps are competing with 2005 times and have already overtaken the 2003 times).

Scotracer, I hope you're right:

However, I seem to recall several references to cutbacks in F1 engine departments because of the freeze. Anyone else have any input on that point?

That is true but Pat Symonds has already stated that the engines are strangled by the rev limit so we can only surmise they would easily run over 21,000rpm if there was no limit. This would mean power in the 840BHP region -- from a 2.4! That is a big jump up from what they are now and I can only hope that when the freeze ends (I have a feeling that when Mosley leaves, the freeze wont last long) we get much added development and that brings back the spectacle it used to be.

On to Rotary:

Bringing the technology into F1 might bring some fundamental improvements but one has to remember, Mazda ran and still run the engine in some racing cars so we can only guess that there isn't much to be done. Of course F1 engine designers with their exorbitantly larger budgets could get more power, but a fundamental switch in the engines operation? I'm not sure.

Still, I'm all for Rotary engines as a 3 or 4-rotor engine screaming down the straights at Monza will be something to behold

Didn't the FIA ban the wankel engine from Group-C because of the weight advantage it had? I know they wanted them to refer over to the 3.5 V10 that was used in F1 but I can't find a proper answer. Any input?

[Henne]

I thought Ilmor was working on those rotary engines back in the day, and yes, they got banned by the FIA.

Why don't we put a fuel limit for one weekend (like others said here). That way teams have to search for "cheaper" ways to run the car, because they need the fuel to get a decent strategy working.

I also think that in the future, we might see a diesel engine but I'm not sure if it will be the big solution. Diesel engine would mean lower RPM (not always but in most cases it does) so more power and shorter shifting.

[freedom_honda]

i heard the current Honda engine is relly low on power compare to other teams.
can anyone comfirm that?
their speed trap figures havent been impressive for the last two season (2007 and 2008)

[bazanaius]

I think this is an interesting point.
People say that the introduction of the new aero rules and KERS will help teams like renault and Honda get nearer the front, but personally I can't see it happening because we know for a fact that Renault's engine has problems with low end torque, and the honda is underpowered. This isn't going to change during the engine freeze and so they'll be at a disadvantage until this changes.
Teams I can see improving will be those who have competitive machinery but simply have started off too far down the grid to play (Toro Rosso, FIF1 spring to mind - I think we'll see them strongly in the mid pack).

B

[Conceptual]

I think this is an interesting point.
People say that the introduction of the new aero rules and KERS will help teams like renault and Honda get nearer the front, but personally I can't see it happening because we know for a fact that Renault's engine has problems with low end torque, and the honda is underpowered. This isn't going to change during the engine freeze and so they'll be at a disadvantage until this changes.
Teams I can see improving will be those who have competitive machinery but simply have started off too far down the grid to play (Toro Rosso, FIF1 spring to mind - I think we'll see them strongly in the mid pack).

B

I wouldnt count out RBR trading the Renault engine for a Mercedes engine. Especially since Newey has alot of experience with the Merc, and with the freeze, there is no possible solution to gaining more HP from the Renault.

Chris

[Scotracer]

Red Bull switched to the Renault unit because of cooling reasons (the Ferrari engine apparently runs hotter) and they said there was no performance difference between the two.

Also, in 2006, the Renault and Ferrari engines were the two most powerful and the Mercedes was lacking (it just couldn't rev). So, how did Renault lose out so badly?

[bazanaius]

This is a guess, but I think it may be related to tyres. I vaguely recall an autosport interview with Pat Symonds, and he talked about this and how the car just didn't like pulling away.
Can anyone find this?

[Conceptual]

Red Bull switched to the Renault unit because of cooling reasons (the Ferrari engine apparently runs hotter) and they said there was no performance difference between the two.

Also, in 2006, the Renault and Ferrari engines were the two most powerful and the Mercedes was lacking (it just couldn't rev). So, how did Renault lose out so badly?

Well, since the MP4-23 seems to be able to stay cool with way undersized sidepods, I would say that the cooling aspect may be even better with the Merc engine.

Renault lost out because they actually held to the rules. Both Ferrari and Merc have (legally) upgraded their engines and lubricants, where Renault have not.

This is why an engine freeze sucks. I wouldn't hold anything against Honda, Toyota, Renault and BMW if they were to simply sit out the next 3 seasons until they can actually develop their engines again to compete with Ferrari and McMerc.

Why would you even want to show up at a race, knowing that you are down 50-75 BHP? You KNOW that you cannot fight for wins. You KNOW that you cannot make up that much of a disadvantage with aero. You KNOW that you can only finish well if the other teams mess up (Canada).

To me, the engine freeze will directly result in Ferrari and McLaren winning the WCC/WDC until the freeze is over.

It must be hard to justify the expense of running a F1 team when you have ZERO chance of winning under normal conditions.

Eventually, the teams will have board members asking if it is really worth it, and when the answer is NO, we may only have a 8 car field until the regs change.

The 2009 aero regs will NOT help teams that are underpowered and not allowed to catch up. BMW is realistically the only engine out there that MAY spoil the Ferrari/McMerc dominance with the aero changes.

That just makes the rest of the teams even BIGGER losers of money, and reputation.

Chris