Jump to content


Photo

V8 vs V6 engines - nostalgia vs modernization


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:05


In recent times, Bernie "scruz mcduck" Eclestone is beating his bushes trying to ban V6 turbos even when he initially seemed to like it and not to mention all the manufacturers have put bucket of wad already developing it.

i seriously doubt Bernie can/should stop the V6 turbo, and frankly i don't see what's the fuss is about. i for one would love to see V6 turbo's (maybe i'm a engineer :smoking: ). they are representative of things that you get in the car that you can afford. Also all the green crap is just BS. it's pretty well known that turbo needs same/more fuel than NA ones (turbo needs power of exhaust gas,it's not free), it's not freaking diesel, so saving fuel is not the issue. i care less about sound, sound is generated by exhaust layout. 6 cylinder can produce the same noise as 8 one's, and i love the sound of turbo wastegates chirping. Also in race, the driver boost management and same fuel for everyone should throw up new strategies and more variables (short overboost for overtaking comes to mind).

also Autosport did a feature on V6 turbos, and specially Renault wants it more than anyone, and seeing the amount of teams they supply engines to, i wouldn't be surprised if in 2014 50% of the teams choose renault over merc/ferrari. Mercedes is also keen on v6 as they've switched to more turbo V6's in their road cars. Only ferrari seems not to like the idea, but honestly, apart from F1 heritage, ferrari is not representive of the wider automotive world.

And not to forget, VW and Honda have expressed their desire to return to F1, i'd doubt they'll like V8's over turbo V6's. it's how marketing works, if u open a newspaper and saw a renault clio saying ''our car performance is developed from the same v6 turbo technology in F1'', rather '' our v6 turbo in megane is best cause we make the best NA V8 for RBR'' which would sell more cars???

now let's here the pros-cons regarding this matter. :cool:

Advertisement

#2 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,401 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:12

In recent times, Bernie "scruz mcduck" Eclestone is beating his bushes trying to ban V6 turbos even apart from F1 heritage, ferrari is not representive of the wider automotive world.



Lol. I wonder how you can said this

Edited by Massa, 10 October 2012 - 12:13.


#3 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:19

Lol. I wonder how you can said this


how many people in your neighborhood has a v8 ferrari??? :stoned:

#4 Boing Ball

Boing Ball
  • Member

  • 118 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:24

Also all the green crap is just BS. it's pretty well known that turbo needs same/more fuel than NA ones (turbo needs power of exhaust gas,it's not free), it's not freaking diesel, so saving fuel is not the issue.


Are you serious? Exhaust gasses are free - it's supercharging that's not free.


#5 dau

dau
  • Member

  • 4,578 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:32

Why didn't you use one of the exisiting threads about the 2014 engines?

#6 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:36

Are you serious? Exhaust gasses are free - it's supercharging that's not free.


the amount of exhaust gas produced by NA engine won't turn a turbo sufficiently high enough to create boost. also there is the thing of cooling in TC engines. normally even in high performance NA engines, not all fuel burns to create power, some fuel is used to cool the engine cylinder, this is even higher in TC engines. and to maintain a constant rpm in TC to avoid lag, they have to use high fuel that will burn just to produce the necessary gasses at exhaust to keep boost up even in slow corners. (anti-lag system used in WRC cars, look it up) it's a balancing act. i'm expecting 700-750/800 hp in quali trim from TC V6's.

#7 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:38

Why didn't you use one of the exisiting threads about the 2014 engines?


A.that thread is kinda forgotten
B.it's a 'X' vs 'Y' thread, not a generalization thread. (thank Bernie for that :p )

:kiss:

#8 Wormstrum

Wormstrum
  • Member

  • 45 posts
  • Joined: December 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:43

how many people in your neighborhood has a v8 ferrari??? :stoned:


Two

#9 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,720 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:44

it's pretty well known that turbo needs same/more fuel than NA ones (turbo needs power of exhaust gas,it's not free), it's not freaking diesel, so saving fuel is not the issue. i care less about sound, sound is generated by exhaust layout.


Erm, no.

Turbochargered engines are more efficienct.



#10 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,401 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:48

how many people in your neighborhood has a v8 ferrari??? :stoned:


I live in Paris. You have to know that in France, 90% of people have a diesel car.

Edited by Massa, 10 October 2012 - 12:48.


#11 03011969

03011969
  • Member

  • 521 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:55

I live in Paris. You have to know that in France, 90% of people have a diesel car.

Mmm, that would mean a lot of children owning cars too.

Or do you mean 90% of French owned cars are diesel?

</pedantic>

#12 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 12:59

I live in Paris. You have to know that in France, 90% of people have a diesel car.


i live in germany and most people use small hatches (with/without turbo), diesel is also popular specially with large sedans. :smoking: and i've only seen 2 ferraris in last 3 years. even the porsches are mostly flat-6's with TC. thus my point of representing the majority automotive world.

Edited by eronrules, 10 October 2012 - 13:01.


#13 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,941 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 14:34

Mmm, that would mean a lot of children owning cars too.

Or do you mean 90% of French owned cars are diesel?

</pedantic>


Or perhaps 90% of those who own a car...

#14 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 10 October 2012 - 17:11

It has zero relevance to road cars.

If you choose to drive a V6 economy is not important to you.

If they wanted to make it relevant they'd allow aluminum versions of production engine blocks, and mandate a MPG efficiency.

Otherwise, the engineering is completely different. F1 is ENTERTAINMENT.

ENTERTAINMENT.


"Wow, that sure was exciting watching that Ferrari get great fuel economy! Not to mention it's no louder than my own street car! I am THRILLED! I'll pay anything to see this again!".

Good luck with that, FOM.



#15 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 10 October 2012 - 17:13

i care less about sound, sound is generated by exhaust layout. 6 cylinder can produce the same noise as 8 one's


You are an engineer? Explain how you get the same sound with 200 less hp going through the exhaust, at lower rpm, AND with a turbo in the way?





#16 Cool Beans

Cool Beans
  • Member

  • 1,553 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 10 October 2012 - 17:15

Otherwise, the engineering is completely different. F1 is ENTERTAINMENT.

ENTERTAINMENT.


"Wow, that sure was exciting watching that Ferrari get great fuel economy! Not to mention it's no louder than my own street car! I am THRILLED! I'll pay anything to see this again!".

Good luck with that, FOM.

This.

:up:

Edited by beancounter, 10 October 2012 - 17:16.


#17 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 17:19

You are an engineer? Explain how you get the same sound with 200 less hp going through the exhaust, at lower rpm, AND with a turbo in the way?



by same sound, i meant same decibel, off course you'll gonna have the characteristics turbo sound. also take into account the high torque of turbo engine compared to NA engines. which means turbo engines will have a steady and higher torque curve over a wide range resulting in less frequent gear change. so obviously there will be some change.

p.s yes i'm an engineer and who told you the new engines are gonna be 200 hp less powerful :smoking: ????

#18 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 17:24

It has zero relevance to road cars.

If you choose to drive a V6 economy is not important to you.

If they wanted to make it relevant they'd allow aluminum versions of production engine blocks, and mandate a MPG efficiency.

Otherwise, the engineering is completely different. F1 is ENTERTAINMENT.

ENTERTAINMENT.


"Wow, that sure was exciting watching that Ferrari get great fuel economy! Not to mention it's no louder than my own street car! I am THRILLED! I'll pay anything to see this again!".

Good luck with that, FOM.



then why bother chasing all the aero development and exhaust blowing and other shits if it's only entertainment you want??? face it, formula 1 is a predominantly engineering driven sport, it lives on innovation, and engineers love challanges. last couple of years, it has been strangled by FIA with rules and regs. 2014 engine change is a huge engineering challenge that may well shift the balance. i don't see any reason why that'd be bad for entertainment??? i'll bet the same panic mongers growled in early 80's when most teams ditched cosworth DFV's for renault/honda/bmw turbo's. so my advice is, be patience and give it a go. :kiss:

#19 King Six

King Six
  • Member

  • 3,230 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 18:20

Too many new F1 fans and younger people who only care about the entertainment, Kimi Rakkonnen swearing on TV and eating ice cream and drivers saying stupid stuff on twitter to care about the science and engineering in F1. Even the teams, they only want to make a hefty profit rather than develop anything as it "costs too much" and would rather have a "good show"

There seems to be little passion any more in the sport to actually progress.

F1 has changed, the fans have changed, the sport has changed. You can lead a horse to the water but you can't force it to drink. I'm not surprised most people are annoyed at seeing the V8's go. They're much cheaper and more entertaining, it's all F1 is about these days.

It also heavily reflects modern Western society in general. Hardly anyone goes into science and engineering and governments don't care about it anymore. Western countries and societies have effectively abandoned it in favour of becoming conniving businessmen, bankers and lawyers and trying to get rich quick off the backs of others, whilst watching cheap but highly profitable reality television.

Especially in the UK, the country abandoned everything in favour of a financial industry based in London and a useless service sector. And now we're ****ed because of it.

Edited by King Six, 10 October 2012 - 18:25.


Advertisement

#20 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,941 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 18:26

Too many new F1 fans and younger people who only care about the entertainment, Kimi Rakkonnen swearing on TV and eating ice cream and drivers saying stupid stuff on twitter to care about the science and engineering in F1. Even the teams, they only want to make a hefty profit rather than develop anything as it "costs too much" and would rather have a "good show"

There seems to be little passion any more in the sport to actually progress.

F1 has changed, the fans have changed, the sport has changed. You can lead a horse to the water but you can't force it to drink. I'm not surprised most people are annoyed at seeing the V8's go. They're much cheaper and more entertaining, it's all F1 is about these days.

It also heavily reflects modern Western society in general. Hardly anyone goes into science and engineering and governments don't care about it anymore. Western countries and societies have effectively abandoned it in favour of becoming conniving businessmen, bankers and lawyers and trying to get rich quick off the backs of others, whilst watching cheap but highly profitable reality television.

Especially in the UK, the country abandoned everything in favour of a financial industry based in London and a useless service sector. And now we're ****ed because of it.


Jeez, you seem obsessed with Kimi...

#21 King Six

King Six
  • Member

  • 3,230 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 18:29

I just think it provides the perfect example of the modern F1 fan. They all think he's so cool and unique because he appeals to the lowest common denominators. He's the most popular driver now because attitudes have wildly changed, like my mini rant was about anyway. Kimi is just another cog in the box of bullshit and anti-intellectualism that's happened to Western society, ranging from the decline in science and engineering to the rise of reality television.

#22 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 18:45

Too many new F1 fans and younger people who only care about the entertainment, Kimi Rakkonnen swearing on TV and eating ice cream and drivers saying stupid stuff on twitter to care about the science and engineering in F1. Even the teams, they only want to make a hefty profit rather than develop anything as it "costs too much" and would rather have a "good show"

There seems to be little passion any more in the sport to actually progress.

F1 has changed, the fans have changed, the sport has changed. You can lead a horse to the water but you can't force it to drink. I'm not surprised most people are annoyed at seeing the V8's go. They're much cheaper and more entertaining, it's all F1 is about these days.

It also heavily reflects modern Western society in general. Hardly anyone goes into science and engineering and governments don't care about it anymore. Western countries and societies have effectively abandoned it in favour of becoming conniving businessmen, bankers and lawyers and trying to get rich quick off the backs of others, whilst watching cheap but highly profitable reality television.

Especially in the UK, the country abandoned everything in favour of a financial industry based in London and a useless service sector. And now we're ****ed because of it.


:up:

makes you wonder that Italians know more about car setup and engineering these days than Brits, back in the hayday of 80s, people knew the cars much better than today. now a days, drivers in twitter and WAGS and FAGS make the headlines more often than technicalities. :down:

#23 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 836 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:03

You are an engineer? Explain how you get the same sound with 200 less hp going through the exhaust, at lower rpm, AND with a turbo in the way?


This whole sound thing is such a red herring. How many people at F1 where earplugs? Most, I would say. I didn't at Spa this year and man I regretted it. Ears ringing for a week. Yes the sound is half the experience but when it's too loud to be comfortable to start with, turning it down a bit is no bad thing.

Aside from volume... Tone / pitch: a lot of people love the shriek of a turbo. I'm looking forward to it.

#24 MrFondue

MrFondue
  • Member

  • 326 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:14

ENTERTAINMENT.


No. F1 is a sport. The so called "Pro" wrestling is entertainment.

#25 Anonymous

Anonymous
  • Member

  • 2,948 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:15

I believe that Ferrari has serious problems with V6 Turbo engines.

#26 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,941 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:18

This whole sound thing is such a red herring. How many people at F1 where earplugs? Most, I would say. I didn't at Spa this year and man I regretted it. Ears ringing for a week. Yes the sound is half the experience but when it's too loud to be comfortable to start with, turning it down a bit is no bad thing.

Aside from volume... Tone / pitch: a lot of people love the shriek of a turbo. I'm looking forward to it.


So you think it is both a bit of a distraction and "half the experience"?

You cannot get away from the fact that sound matters to many people, hence why a lot of people are not entirely sure about these upcoming changes. I went to my first race in 2010. Before I even saw a car, I heard the sound (at the entrance of Monza park) and it is still the sound which thrills me most. Sorry if some people don't see it as a big deal, but many, like me, do.

That said, maybe the V6's will sound good and this argument will be for nothing. As a few have said, it seems hard to believe.

#27 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 6,421 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:24

So you think it is both a bit of a distraction and "half the experience"?

You cannot get away from the fact that sound matters to many people, hence why a lot of people are not entirely sure about these upcoming changes. I went to my first race in 2010. Before I even saw a car, I heard the sound (at the entrance of Monza park) and it is still the sound which thrills me most. Sorry if some people don't see it as a big deal, but many, like me, do.

That said, maybe the V6's will sound good and this argument will be for nothing. As a few have said, it seems hard to believe.


If you've ever heard any other engines than the V8's, you'd know that your fears are ungrounded. The former engines sounded fine, as will the new turbos.

#28 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 836 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:39

So you think it is both a bit of a distraction and "half the experience"?

You cannot get away from the fact that sound matters to many people, hence why a lot of people are not entirely sure about these upcoming changes. I went to my first race in 2010. Before I even saw a car, I heard the sound (at the entrance of Monza park) and it is still the sound which thrills me most. Sorry if some people don't see it as a big deal, but many, like me, do.

That said, maybe the V6's will sound good and this argument will be for nothing. As a few have said, it seems hard to believe.


The two things aren't contradictory. It's half the experience while wearing earplugs. If quieter it can still be half the experience just with less effective earplugs.

Agree that the sound is thrilling before your're even inside the track. However you'd still get that thrill, just have to be a bit geographically closer? Would I have been less excited at Spa to first hear the engines from the entrance (still a long way from the track) instead of the car parks a mile away?

Edit: furthermore, where did you get that I meant it was a distraction? I regretted not wearing earplugs because the sound of 24 F1 cars going full bore through Eau Rouge left me slightly deaf for days, in no way was the sound distracting. It was wondrous - until the pain started...

Edited by Treads, 10 October 2012 - 19:44.


#29 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:52

The two things aren't contradictory. It's half the experience while wearing earplugs. If quieter it can still be half the experience just with less effective earplugs.

Agree that the sound is thrilling before your're even inside the track. However you'd still get that thrill, just have to be a bit geographically closer? Would I have been less excited at Spa to first hear the engines from the entrance (still a long way from the track) instead of the car parks a mile away?

Edit: furthermore, where did you get that I meant it was a distraction? I regretted not wearing earplugs because the sound of 24 F1 cars going full bore through Eau Rouge left me slightly deaf for days, in no way was the sound distracting. It was wondrous - until the pain started...



aren't we forgetting something??? 95% of people watch formula 1 on telly, most of us never saw a static formula car, let alone attend GPs and see running cars due to where we live. so for us >95%, sound of f1 car is what TV broadcasts it to be, and also said before, many people like turbo noises, so for them it's a throwback to 80's exciting turbo era. but for the sake of argument, is only sound of F1 cars excite people or the drivers and race craft??? it's racing people, coupled with engineering, not sound/beauty contest.

#30 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 836 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 19:59

aren't we forgetting something??? 95% of people watch formula 1 on telly, most of us never saw a static formula car, let alone attend GPs and see running cars due to where we live. so for us >95%, sound of f1 car is what TV broadcasts it to be, and also said before, many people like turbo noises, so for them it's a throwback to 80's exciting turbo era. but for the sake of argument, is only sound of F1 cars excite people or the drivers and race craft??? it's racing people, coupled with engineering, not sound/beauty contest.


To be entirely balanced, I don't think many people are saying that the sound is the WHOLE experience. But it is certainly a part. And when most of the step-nose cars are ugly as sin, when the engineering has been forced into artificial exploitation of rule loopholes instead of true innovation, and when in many people's eyes the purity of the racing has been removed via DRS / boiled egg tyres, losing the sound element might kill the appeal for some people. However, as I note above, I don't believe this will be the case.

Your point re: the TV audience, however, is spot on. The sound will jiust be rebalanced, no one at home will hear a volume difference.


#31 Ramses1348

Ramses1348
  • Member

  • 577 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 20:12

talking about nostalgia for the V8 seems strange to me... the V10 maybe, but the V8...

#32 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 20:19

talking about nostalgia for the V8 seems strange to me... the V10 maybe, but the V8...


nostalgia for naturally aspirated sound really, not V8 in general.

#33 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 14,305 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 22:14

I thought it was pretty good when engine builders were allowed to choose...

#34 morrino

morrino
  • Member

  • 159 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:36

I won't miss the sound of the V8s. IMO they're the worst sounding engines in the history of F1. They are just very loud.

#35 Bartel

Bartel
  • Member

  • 887 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:44

They should have a set displacement, and the engine makers can have whatever engine they want as long as they are capped at the same displacement, that way we'd have variety at least, different cars sounding different, i dont like that each car sounds the same, its boring and not special anymore, back in the 90's when a Ferrari V12 went past, you knew about it.

#36 George Costanza

George Costanza
  • Member

  • 2,505 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:48

V12 has more nostalgia than any V10, V8, V6.

Think... Ferrari V12 high pitch scream, Honda V12 hollering, Mercedes V12 (in other racing series, CLK GTR for an example) BMW V12 (McLaren BMW for Le Mans).

Anyway, in F1, there have Maserati V12 (60s), Alfa Romeo V12, even Lamborghini had a V12 engine.

I wish F1 would re-introduce the V12 engines.... as a mandate.

Imagine this: Alonso driving a Ferrari with a V12.... Indeed.



#37 BigCHrome

BigCHrome
  • Member

  • 4,049 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:52

Actually those new V6t's are about 30% more efficient than the current V8s.

#38 jimm

jimm
  • Member

  • 3,228 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:58

Nostalgia would be a mix of v8s, v or flat 12s with turbocharged v8s, v6s and inline 4s.

#39 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 1,443 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:05

I thought it was pretty good when engine builders were allowed to choose...


yup

Advertisement

#40 SchumacherBest01

SchumacherBest01
  • New Member

  • 26 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:19

about DRS and kers....i actually think the races were so much better back then in 2005 when FIA decided to change the rule in making DRS liked rear wing.

nowadays, the car cant even get close to each other due to aero dependency...

sad case for f1



#41 Scorg

Scorg
  • Member

  • 2,687 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:38

Dont forget for nostalgia, there was a period from the mid 70's to mid 80's where the very engine type some teams used was a 1.5l V6 Turbo

#42 crbassassin

crbassassin
  • Member

  • 426 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 11 October 2012 - 05:16

how many people in your neighborhood has a v8 ferrari??? :stoned:


none

#43 Tombstone

Tombstone
  • Member

  • 1,118 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:22

Nostalgia would be a mix of v8s, v or flat 12s with turbocharged v8s, v6s and inline 4s.


Amen to that. '82 & '83 were glorious from an engine variety point of view: I4t, V6t, V8t, V8na, & V12na.

Fix the fuel tank size at some arbitrary figure - 30 gallons say, and let the engineers do their stuff. Not the best way to reduce costs mind.



Frankly, as someone who started watching F1 in the 70s all this whining about losing the sound of V8s (and V10s for that matter) is a lot of fuss about nothing. The sound will be different, not better, not worse, just different.

#44 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,231 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:45

Amen to that. '82 & '83 were glorious from an engine variety point of view: I4t, V6t, V8t, V8na, & V12na.

Fix the fuel tank size at some arbitrary figure - 30 gallons say, and let the engineers do their stuff. Not the best way to reduce costs mind.



Frankly, as someone who started watching F1 in the 70s all this whining about losing the sound of V8s (and V10s for that matter) is a lot of fuss about nothing. The sound will be different, not better, not worse, just different.


regarding noise :up:

regarding engine variety

that worked in 80's cause the lack of modern electronics i.e ECU's and lack of material development ,design etc etc etc. now a days, too many variable to equilize engine performance. also take into account that v8's occupy much larger space than v6 turbos, so aero alone will make v8's obsolete. but the biggest issue will come from torque. turbo cars have much higher and flatter torque curve than rev happy v8's.

martin whitmarsh in a intervew a while back rejected the idea of engine parity, they tried it during 2006 with toro rosso using restricted v10s. didn't work.