Concept power units from 2030

[mzso]

Perhaps it doesn't have to be something different than what we've already had previously. The sound spectacle has taken a back seat in the current formula, and it has once more taken a back seat for 2026. With the fuel flow rate limiting RPM to give or take 12,500PM, how can any formula sound intense, electrifying and thoroughly vibrate your body with such a restriction? Look at the leaked 2014 ferrari F1 engine sound that was effectively their engine in a road car, which rev'd way, way above 12,500RPM. The scream was very, very nice, and made all the characteristic noises of the early 2014 V6 engines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29_yiOp_Xyc

I fail to see why extra noise should be a factor.
Excitement should be delivered by racing, and technological marvel.

And I don't think that video supports you. As it revs up it sounds like an current F1 car at rather low pace.

Well yes, it does sound like the current F1 cars as it revs up because it's the ferrari F1 engine. However, the one in the video revs higher than the currently used ones, and the higher pitched sound that many fans enjoy from previous engine eras comes through. I agree that good racing and technological improvements are important, but saying that extra noise is not a factor to be considered is obtuse, bearing in mind that one of the main criticism's of current F1 is the reduction in noise and quality of that engine sound. It's gotten more appreciation, but F1 is a spectacle, and engine sound has historically gone hand in hand with it. This isn't formula e.

Only a few loud people complain about it. And they're are getting less, as old people who can only imagine racing with noise, die out.

[mzso]

... I suspect it was the time they used beryllium and such....

this was a major constituent of the piston material (only)
the weight saving there allowing c.1000 rpm more and so more power from the displacement-limited rules then
but useless with the fuel quantity/rate-limited rules today

Then how would/did they go down to like 35kg from the more typical 100kg weight?

[Zynerji]

Has anyone heard of this tech? It seems dead, but maybe cool?


https://web.archive.org/web/20071112033 ... opment.htm


https://web.archive.org/web/20071112033 ... _video.htm

[Greg Locock]

Wankel style engines suffer from crevices, high surface area to combustion ratio, and seals. The first two cause emissions problems with unburnt HC, which necessarily affects efficiency.

"3.5 horsepower (net indicated) / 2.1 horsepower (brake) "

40% of imep lost in friction pumping and ancillaries seems very high. Heywood suggests 10% at full power.

[mzso]

Wankel style engines suffer from crevices, high surface area to combustion ratio, and seals. The first two cause emissions problems with unburnt HC, which necessarily affects efficiency.

"3.5 horsepower (net indicated) / 2.1 horsepower (brake) "

40% of imep lost in friction pumping and ancillaries seems very high. Heywood suggests 10% at full power.

Well, technically it would be a toy to be raced around in circles for 1.5-2 hours. So it depends on how whether the efficiency is bad enough to make it not practical for F1. (As long as we're no making the formula an eco role model).

Anyway, no-one suggested anything else so far that might have higher power density than common piston engines.

[mzso]

People often claim to want a small and light engine. But they usually go to v8-v10 suggestions afteward, which doesn't make sense to me. The old turbos had the best power density in F1, didn't they? Some were only four cylinders and 1500cc.

Anyway what would be the best for lightest motors? I'm thinking something exotic. Recently I saw a mention of the "two stroke" LiquidPiston type motor.
I can't imagine anything more power dense than such an engine turbo charged with six combustion events in two rotations.

I remember the good old days of a V10 weighing 35kg and then the FIA mandated it to a minimum of 45kg and then kept increacing it from then on...

I looked this up a bit, but I only saw references to 90-100+ kg engine weights near the end of the V10 era. So I'm a bit suspicious about this remark.
Also I don't remember a minimum weight until the current hybrid engines.

[DenBommer]

Has anyone heard of this tech? It seems dead, but maybe cool?


https://web.archive.org/web/20071112033 ... opment.htm


https://web.archive.org/web/20071112033 ... _video.htm

Then I personally see even more potential in this technology that you once suggested: https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/0 ... -ornl.html


I once chatted with the free version of ChatGPT and came up with the following:

A 1.6-liter V6 naturally aspirated engine with superlubricity and HCCI ignition that runs between 18,000 and 20,000 rpm, with between 35 and 45 kg of fuel on board.

An axial flux electric motor with regenerative braking between the combustion engine and the transmission, providing 250 hp.

And the same type of electric motor on the front axle, also providing 250 hp.

Active aerodynamics are, of course, also included.

[DenBommer]

https://www.thedrive.com/news/michelin- ... themselves

Are there any ideas for tires from 2030/2035 onwards?

Since Michelin says they are willing to produce tires for F1 only if they don't wear out.

But how would that look?

Theoretically, it is already possible today to make a soft tire that can last an entire race or even an entire season.
But tire changes seem so essential to the sport. So if that were to disappear, it would be a loss in my opinion.

[Tommy Cookers]

... I suspect it was the time they used beryllium and such....

this was a major constituent of the piston material (only)
the weight saving there allowing c.1000 rpm more and so more power from the displacement-limited rules then
but useless with the fuel quantity/rate-limited rules today

Then how would/did they go down to like 35kg from the more typical 100kg weight?

that never happened ...
35 kg was the weight reduction over some years (of progress to 'size-zero')

[Vappy]

I fail to see why extra noise should be a factor.
Excitement should be delivered by racing, and technological marvel.

And I don't think that video supports you. As it revs up it sounds like an current F1 car at rather low pace.

Well yes, it does sound like the current F1 cars as it revs up because it's the ferrari F1 engine. However, the one in the video revs higher than the currently used ones, and the higher pitched sound that many fans enjoy from previous engine eras comes through. I agree that good racing and technological improvements are important, but saying that extra noise is not a factor to be considered is obtuse, bearing in mind that one of the main criticism's of current F1 is the reduction in noise and quality of that engine sound. It's gotten more appreciation, but F1 is a spectacle, and engine sound has historically gone hand in hand with it. This isn't formula e.

Only a few loud people complain about it. And they're are getting less, as old people who can only imagine racing with noise, die out.

Disregarding fans because of their age is a not a good argument, as you're summarising that only older generations enjoy louder engine formulas prior to the current one. Looks like I won't be getting any common sense from you.

[CMSMJ1]

People often claim to want a small and light engine. But they usually go to v8-v10 suggestions afteward, which doesn't make sense to me. The old turbos had the best power density in F1, didn't they? Some were only four cylinders and 1500cc.

Anyway what would be the best for lightest motors? I'm thinking something exotic. Recently I saw a mention of the "two stroke" LiquidPiston type motor.
I can't imagine anything more power dense than such an engine turbo charged with six combustion events in two rotations.

I remember the good old days of a V10 weighing 35kg and then the FIA mandated it to a minimum of 45kg and then kept increacing it from then on...

There's been a few posts calling this one out - I would also like to know where you recall this one from?

There was never, in my remembering, anything like an engine from 1996 onwards that was anywhere close to 35kg. I have a small 400cc V4 motorbie engine stashed in my container..it must weigh at least 55kg and there is nothing to it.

Be good to review this one - this is F1 Technical...after all

[Hoffman900]

Page 25:
https://www.f1-forecast.com/pdf/F1-File ... 2e_all.pdf


Lightest they got was 89kg

[Rodak]

... I suspect it was the time they used beryllium and such....

this was a major constituent of the piston material (only)
the weight saving there allowing c.1000 rpm more and so more power from the displacement-limited rules then
but useless with the fuel quantity/rate-limited rules today

Then how would/did they go down to like 35kg from the more typical 100kg weight?

Quick answer, they didn't. No one ever made a modern F1 engine to that weight, although BMW claimed they could get down to around 70 kg, but regulations were 95 kg minimum.

[Hoffman900]

this was a major constituent of the piston material (only)
the weight saving there allowing c.1000 rpm more and so more power from the displacement-limited rules then
but useless with the fuel quantity/rate-limited rules today

Then how would/did they go down to like 35kg from the more typical 100kg weight?

Quick answer, they didn't. No one ever made a modern F1 engine to that weight, although BMW claimed they could get down to around 70 kg, but regulations were 95 kg minimum.

Did they ever clarify that it was 70kg wet or dry? With manifolds? With fuel rails, etc.

[Cold Fussion]

I remember the good old days of a V10 weighing 35kg and then the FIA mandated it to a minimum of 45kg and then kept increacing it from then on...

There's been a few posts calling this one out - I would also like to know where you recall this one from?

There was never, in my remembering, anything like an engine from 1996 onwards that was anywhere close to 35kg. I have a small 400cc V4 motorbie engine stashed in my container..it must weigh at least 55kg and there is nothing to it.

Be good to review this one - this is F1 Technical...after all

It's recalled from the machinations in his mind and from no where in objective reality.

Perhaps it doesn't have to be something different than what we've already had previously. The sound spectacle has taken a back seat in the current formula, and it has once more taken a back seat for 2026. With the fuel flow rate limiting RPM to give or take 12,500PM, how can any formula sound intense, electrifying and thoroughly vibrate your body with such a restriction? Look at the leaked 2014 ferrari F1 engine sound that was effectively their engine in a road car, which rev'd way, way above 12,500RPM. The scream was very, very nice, and made all the characteristic noises of the early 2014 V6 engines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29_yiOp_Xyc

I think the sound debate is firmly in the past. With the huge influx of new F1 fans since covid, there might be quite a large of percentage of fans who have never heard anything other than the current 1.6L engines at all.