I read this interview:gandharva wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 11:18Renault ready for new approach to unleash 'magic modes'
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... es-966533/
What is PS ?baybars wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 14:29I read this interview:gandharva wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 11:18Renault ready for new approach to unleash 'magic modes'
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... es-966533/
My highlight
Renault and Mercedes gap is nearly 0.5 sec about 25 PS in qualifying
Renault and Mercedes gap is between 0.2-0.4 sec(depend on the track.) about 10-20 PS in race
He hoped that 2018 Engine performance will very decent position to say the least against Mercedes on a Sunday.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepowe ... s.2C_ch.29mclaren111 wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 12:35What is PS ?baybars wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 14:29I read this interview:gandharva wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 11:18Renault ready for new approach to unleash 'magic modes'
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... es-966533/
My highlight
Renault and Mercedes gap is nearly 0.5 sec about 25 PS in qualifying
Renault and Mercedes gap is between 0.2-0.4 sec(depend on the track.) about 10-20 PS in race
He hoped that 2018 Engine performance will very decent position to say the least against Mercedes on a Sunday.
Not an Engineer. Please explain in layman terms. Thxwuzak wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 12:46https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepowe ... s.2C_ch.29mclaren111 wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 12:35What is PS ?baybars wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 14:29
I read this interview:
My highlight
Renault and Mercedes gap is nearly 0.5 sec about 25 PS in qualifying
Renault and Mercedes gap is between 0.2-0.4 sec(depend on the track.) about 10-20 PS in race
He hoped that 2018 Engine performance will very decent position to say the least against Mercedes on a Sunday.
PS = Pferdestärke, about the same as horsepowermclaren111 wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 13:40Not an Engineer. Please explain in layman terms. Thx
I am not sure where you derive the 0.4 sec difference to be 20 PS in race. If I understand correctly, some of these numbers are being used from many years and I am afraid, the change in the weight of the new cars is not being considered. 0.4 sec difference between cars in 2008 equates to a different power difference (purely from PU performance perspective), compared to 2009-2013, compared to 2014-2016 and now compared to 2017 cars. Rise in weight should obviously demand more power to generate a 0.4 sec difference. Someone really need to calculate the exact power requirement, instead of using old ways of looking 0.2-0.4 as 10-20 PS. That may not be ideal.baybars wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 14:29I read this interview:gandharva wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 11:18Renault ready for new approach to unleash 'magic modes'
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... es-966533/
My highlight
Renault and Mercedes gap is nearly 0.5 sec about 25 PS in qualifying
Renault and Mercedes gap is between 0.2-0.4 sec(depend on the track.) about 10-20 PS in race
He hoped that 2018 Engine performance will very decent position to say the least against Mercedes on a Sunday.
Plus: it's a lot more to do with Joules than anything else. Some multiplication of PS and s that is. 40s @ Nnn PS is going beat 35s @ Mmm PS (despite Nnn == Mmm + k where k can even be rather non-negligable.) So for instance: it may well be that Ferrari has more peak power and Renault and Honda pretty much in the vicinity, unless they can apply that power for as long as Mercedes can, then that's all in vain.GPR-A wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 15:11I am not sure where you derive the 0.4 sec difference to be 20 PS in race. If I understand correctly, some of these numbers are being used from many years and I am afraid, the change in the weight of the new cars is not being considered. 0.4 sec difference between cars in 2008 equates to a different power difference (purely from PU performance perspective), compared to 2009-2013, compared to 2014-2016 and now compared to 2017 cars. Rise in weight should obviously demand more power to generate a 0.4 sec difference. Someone really need to calculate the exact power requirement, instead of using old ways of looking 0.2-0.4 as 10-20 PS. That may not be ideal.baybars wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 14:29I read this interview:gandharva wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 11:18Renault ready for new approach to unleash 'magic modes'
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... es-966533/
My highlight
Renault and Mercedes gap is nearly 0.5 sec about 25 PS in qualifying
Renault and Mercedes gap is between 0.2-0.4 sec(depend on the track.) about 10-20 PS in race
He hoped that 2018 Engine performance will very decent position to say the least against Mercedes on a Sunday.
You are rightGPR-A wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 15:11I am not sure where you derive the 0.4 sec difference to be 20 PS in race. If I understand correctly, some of these numbers are being used from many years and I am afraid, the change in the weight of the new cars is not being considered. 0.4 sec difference between cars in 2008 equates to a different power difference (purely from PU performance perspective), compared to 2009-2013, compared to 2014-2016 and now compared to 2017 cars. Rise in weight should obviously demand more power to generate a 0.4 sec difference. Someone really need to calculate the exact power requirement, instead of using old ways of looking 0.2-0.4 as 10-20 PS. That may not be ideal.baybars wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 14:29I read this interview:gandharva wrote: ↑17 Oct 2017, 11:18Renault ready for new approach to unleash 'magic modes'
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/rena ... es-966533/
My highlight
Renault and Mercedes gap is nearly 0.5 sec about 25 PS in qualifying
Renault and Mercedes gap is between 0.2-0.4 sec(depend on the track.) about 10-20 PS in race
He hoped that 2018 Engine performance will very decent position to say the least against Mercedes on a Sunday.
Agreed, only question is whether any engine manufacturer will make an active strategic choice to use a 4th or 5th power unit in exchange for 5-place grid penalties at one or two races? Strategic means it was planned rather than being an "oops, this is where we find ourselves" situation. At some point a single 5-place grid penalty is better than losing the engine that was going to power you through the last 5 races of the season.godlameroso wrote: ↑18 Oct 2017, 18:38Next year will be interesting. I don't think anyone will be able to easily do the 3 power unit rule. I think this guarantees grid penalties for pretty much everyone.