Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 9 votes

2014 Power Units


  • Please log in to reply
1459 replies to this topic

#301 V3TT3L

V3TT3L
  • Member

  • 1,681 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 26 February 2013 - 07:57

WTF!!!

Single stage turbo ?
One Big Turbo ?
No twin turbo ? Not One for each bank of cilinders?
No small+big turbo scheme ? Massive get lag.

Stupid rules :o

Advertisement

#302 BernieEc

BernieEc
  • Member

  • 2,131 posts
  • Joined: August 11

Posted 26 February 2013 - 07:58

Not sure where to post this but I think this mmight be the right place

Apparently it is rumored that honda is secretly working on a v6 2014 engine. If this is true then I expect McLaren to seve ties with mercedes sooner rather than later

http://www.gptoday.c...ct_in_progress/

#303 JimboJones

JimboJones
  • Member

  • 80 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 26 February 2013 - 08:04

WTF!!!

Single stage turbo ?
One Big Turbo ?
No twin turbo ? Not One for each bank of cilinders?
No small+big turbo scheme ? Massive get lag.

Stupid rules :o



It's always been single turbo.
Why would you get lag when it's electrically assisted?

Stupid comment :o

#304 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,869 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 08:05

WTF!!!

Single stage turbo ?
One Big Turbo ?
No twin turbo ? Not One for each bank of cilinders?
No small+big turbo scheme ? Massive get lag.

Stupid rules :o

I think I've read somewhere that ERS will be used to deal with the turbo lag.

#305 One

One
  • Member

  • 6,527 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 26 February 2013 - 08:18

It's always been single turbo.
Why would you get lag when it's electrically assisted?

Stupid comment :o


Meaning KERS loses power for propelling turbo rather than propelling the race car,... not such a stupid comment I guess.
But imagining to perfection a combo system with two KERS motor attached to two turbo that are individually managed and yet another output electric motor yet individually controlled sounds like a over complication... You tell me?

#306 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,463 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 26 February 2013 - 08:36

Meaning KERS loses power for propelling turbo rather than propelling the race car,... not such a stupid comment I guess.
But imagining to perfection a combo system with two KERS motor attached to two turbo that are individually managed and yet another output electric motor yet individually controlled sounds like a over complication... You tell me?


Think of the weight, carrying an extra MGU.

Each of the two turbos would have oversize turbines in order to extract as much energy from the exhaust as possible, so they still would suffer from lag.

As regards to powering the MGUH, I wonder if it will produce enough energy in the times when it isn't powering the MGUK that it will not need to dip into the stored KERS energy. Remember also that there is no limitation of enrgy flow between the MGUH and energy store, nor from the MGUK to and from the MGUH.

I suspect that any additional energy required to spool the turbo will be skimmed off it when it is generating. That is, a small amount is sent to teh energy store, while the remainder goes to the MGUK.

Edited by Wuzak, 26 February 2013 - 08:38.


#307 Treads

Treads
  • Member

  • 739 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:46

Not sure where to post this but I think this mmight be the right place

Apparently it is rumored that honda is secretly working on a v6 2014 engine. If this is true then I expect McLaren to seve ties with mercedes sooner rather than later

http://www.gptoday.c...ct_in_progress/


Fun to speculate but that's all this article is: speculation. It's 2 reasons for reporting Honda may have a secret F1 project are:

1. "Speed Week reports that British sources suspect the newly UK-based Simon could be working on a F1 engine for Honda."

Weasel words equal made-up article.

2. Renault’s Jean-Michel Jalinier said he definitely expects more engine makers to enter F1 under the 2014 rules.

Where's the link to Honda?



#308 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,202 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 26 February 2013 - 12:53

Posted Image

:love: :love: :love:

Meaning KERS loses power for propelling turbo rather than propelling the race car,... not such a stupid comment I guess.
But imagining to perfection a combo system with two KERS motor attached to two turbo that are individually managed and yet another output electric motor yet individually controlled sounds like a over complication... You tell me?



1. turbo moment of inertia is way less than that of supercharger, thus the power used will be negligible compared to the amount generated

2. with modern electronics, it won't be any more complicated than a washing machine, just sense the turbo rpm, divert power with relay mechanism, and spool up the rotor. it's not complicated what so ever.

Edited by eronrules, 26 February 2013 - 13:00.


#309 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 26 February 2013 - 20:32

Nice article of AMuS with good pics. As was said before: Turbine + ERS (MGH + ES) + ECU = no turbo-lag of old.

Edited by H2H, 26 February 2013 - 20:32.


#310 JimboJones

JimboJones
  • Member

  • 80 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 26 February 2013 - 21:56

Posted Image

:love: :love: :love:




1. turbo moment of inertia is way less than that of supercharger, thus the power used will be negligible compared to the amount generated

2. with modern electronics, it won't be any more complicated than a washing machine, just sense the turbo rpm, divert power with relay mechanism, and spool up the rotor. it's not complicated what so ever.



:up: exactly. And even if it is a small energy penalty, you cannot tolerate lag for the sake of drivability.
I imagine the torque being smoothed out at low rpm by deploying to the turbo...

#311 muramasa

muramasa
  • Member

  • 2,971 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 27 February 2013 - 05:20

Where's the link to Honda?

in and between neurons in their brains.


#312 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 816 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:35

With the 2014 V6's expected to produce 600-650bhp in race conditions, considerably less than today's V8's I am keen to hear how the torque outputs compare as I see this being a big difference between N.A. Engines and Turbo's.

http://www.grandprix...ns/ns24871.html


#313 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,202 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:40

With the 2014 V6's expected to produce 600-650bhp in race conditions, considerably less than today's V8's I am keen to hear how the torque outputs compare as I see this being a big difference between N.A. Engines and Turbo's.

http://www.grandprix...ns/ns24871.html



you really expect a Formula engine to produce 600-650??? come now, those doom-mongers doesn't know what boffins are made of. expect atleast 700-750. #trustinboffins :cat:

#314 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 7,538 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:58

With the 2014 V6's expected to produce 600-650bhp in race conditions, considerably less than today's V8's I am keen to hear how the torque outputs compare as I see this being a big difference between N.A. Engines and Turbo's.

http://www.grandprix...ns/ns24871.html

Torque will be considerably higher than the current V8 as has been reported by Renault.


#315 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,463 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:13

you really expect a Formula engine to produce 600-650??? come now, those doom-mongers doesn't know what boffins are made of. expect atleast 700-750. #trustinboffins :cat:


The turbo engine will make around 600hp. Then there is 160hp from the energy recovery systems.

#316 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:22

Torque will be considerably higher than the current V8 as has been reported by Renault.


With the given regs and the physics it should be. AMuS has some nice pics:

Posted Image


Without any shade of doubt things will change quite a bit until the ICE gets bolted on the chassis but it is highly interesting to some bits. Kudos to Renault. :up:

As expected the turbos are big for obvious reasons despite having no variable geometry. The fixed one should be optimized for efficiency at high revs. I wrote before about the issues with a waste-gate which became more likely after the ban of a VGT, especially in the context of the EBD. Now the pics pretty much confirms it. The MGU-H will have a massive impact on the management of the turbine and the power pack as a whole.


Posted Image

Nice article and thanks to Renault for giving us a bit of food for thought.

#317 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,859 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:30

Can we expect some cool sound coming from the waste gates a'la souped up Honda Supras?

#318 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:34

Not sure where to post this but I think this mmight be the right place

Apparently it is rumored that honda is secretly working on a v6 2014 engine. If this is true then I expect McLaren to seve ties with mercedes sooner rather than later

http://www.gptoday.c...ct_in_progress/

Oh dear.

The Honda V8 was rubbish at a time when money was no object for them, I hope their V6 is alot better.
McLaren would be much better off paying Mercedes for engines, than receiving underpowered Honda engines for free.

#319 ruby soho

ruby soho
  • Member

  • 478 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:56

Can we expect some cool sound coming from the waste gates a'la souped up Honda Supras?

I hope to god not.

But yeah, they will have loads more torque! expect to see wheelspin when exiting cornors :clap:

Advertisement

#320 HanD

HanD
  • Member

  • 79 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 27 February 2013 - 13:05

Oh dear.

The Honda V8 was rubbish at a time when money was no object for them, I hope their V6 is alot better.
McLaren would be much better off paying Mercedes for engines, than receiving underpowered Honda engines for free.


Was it the engine freeze that caught Honda out? They weren't using reliability as a guise to improve performance like others. Was that what made them a worse engine or was it already behind from the beginning.

#321 BillBald

BillBald
  • Member

  • 3,338 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 27 February 2013 - 13:28

Was it the engine freeze that caught Honda out? They weren't using reliability as a guise to improve performance like others. Was that what made them a worse engine or was it already behind from the beginning.


Honda brought out a completely redesigned and much more powerful V8 just before the deadline, but the new engine was too unreliable so they stayed with the old one. Ironic, eh?



#322 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,685 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 27 February 2013 - 18:52

you really expect a Formula engine to produce 600-650??? come now, those doom-mongers doesn't know what boffins are made of. expect atleast 700-750. #trustinboffins :cat:


The fuel flow rate dictates it quite strictly. In a closed capacity engine the normal way to increase power output is to increase engine fuel flow rate (i.e. rev higher or increase volumetric efficiency at a given rpm)...but this is fixed for 2014. The way you need to increase power output is then increase thermal efficiency.

This is a far, far harder task so don't expect any miracles - 600BHP seems to be consensus around the manufacturers.



#323 DrProzac

DrProzac
  • Member

  • 1,879 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 27 February 2013 - 19:15

you really expect a Formula engine to produce 600-650??? come now, those doom-mongers doesn't know what boffins are made of. expect atleast 700-750. #trustinboffins :cat:

600 bhp was always the figure everyone was talking about. Plus 120 kW KERS. Fuel flow limit, you know. Which is a big shame, of course.

Torque will be considerably higher than the current V8 as has been reported by Renault.

The difference in torque on the wheels will not be that huge because the revs will be much lower (15k max, but due to the fuel flow it will probably around 12k in practice)

Edited by DrProzac, 27 February 2013 - 19:18.


#324 midgrid

midgrid
  • Member

  • 4,614 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 27 February 2013 - 20:10

Marussia seeking new engine supplier for 2014 to replace Cosworth

"My understanding is that Cosworth won't be making a 2014 engine," said Lowdon. "Obviously I don't work for Cosworth, but that is my understanding. The three suppliers will be Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari."

#325 F1ultimate

F1ultimate
  • Member

  • 2,859 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 27 February 2013 - 20:21

I hope to god not.

But yeah, they will have loads more torque! expect to see wheelspin when exiting cornors :clap:


Yeah. Imagine setting your car up for a dry race but it ends up raining. Oh lord, the spins we'll see without driving aids.

#326 InSearchOfThe

InSearchOfThe
  • Member

  • 514 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 27 February 2013 - 21:10

Marussia seeking new engine supplier for 2014 to replace Cosworth

"My understanding is that Cosworth won't be making a 2014 engine," said Lowdon. "Obviously I don't work for Cosworth, but that is my understanding. The three suppliers will be Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari."


Honda has to come back now. It's the same in MotoGP with Suzuki returning next year. The only separation these 2 'pinnacle' motorsports have from becoming spec series is different manufactures. And 4 for both is great idea.

#327 JimboJones

JimboJones
  • Member

  • 80 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 27 February 2013 - 21:32

With the given regs and the physics it should be. AMuS has some nice pics:

Posted Image


Without any shade of doubt things will change quite a bit until the ICE gets bolted on the chassis but it is highly interesting to some bits. Kudos to Renault. :up:

As expected the turbos are big for obvious reasons despite having no variable geometry. The fixed one should be optimized for efficiency at high revs. I wrote before about the issues with a waste-gate which became more likely after the ban of a VGT, especially in the context of the EBD. Now the pics pretty much confirms it. The MGU-H will have a massive impact on the management of the turbine and the power pack as a whole.


Posted Image

Nice article and thanks to Renault for giving us a bit of food for thought.


I'm afraid you're being rather naive thinking these pics are even remotely genuine. They will be generic props used to get people interested/excited... absolutely 0% chance they will release any info of any actual 2014 components to the public/other teams.

#328 Bunchies

Bunchies
  • Member

  • 1,500 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 27 February 2013 - 23:02

1. turbo moment of inertia is way less than that of supercharger, thus the power used will be negligible compared to the amount generated


The "moment of intertia" has nothing to do with power loss in comparison to a supercharger. What if the supercharger snail is the same size?

Then the power loss is from the design of the supercharger itself, as it does not use consumed exhaust flow to spool. It uses a belt/pulley.

Nothing to do with moment of inertia. A bigger turbo is still goign to suffer less power loss than a smaller super.

#329 phoenix101

phoenix101
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 28 February 2013 - 07:07

you really expect a Formula engine to produce 600-650??? come now, those doom-mongers doesn't know what boffins are made of. expect atleast 700-750. #trustinboffins :cat:


I do trust the boffins to keep raising power output, but 750hp from 100kg/h is 45% thermal efficiency, if I've done the math correctly. Just for reference, 45% is the thermal efficiency target for the 5th generation Prius (Toyota is currently developing the 4th gen for 2015). Even 600hp is 36%, which seems difficult to believe, but perhaps MGU-H and 500bar DI will be more effective than we know.

Call me skeptical, but I think the FIA has already taken some liberties with what the boffins will achieve.

#330 BigCHrome

BigCHrome
  • Member

  • 4,049 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 28 February 2013 - 07:46

It's a shame that the output is so low. They should've been aiming at at least 800 hp from the ICE alone.

#331 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 28 February 2013 - 10:44

It's a shame that the output is so low. They should've been aiming at at least 800 hp from the ICE alone.


But like KERS I think the output has been limited so that the big players can't gain an advantage. All to do with levelling the playing field by bringing everyone down to the same level.

#332 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:36

I'm afraid you're being rather naive thinking these pics are even remotely genuine. They will be generic props used to get people interested/excited... absolutely 0% chance they will release any info of any actual 2014 components to the public/other teams. Same goes for the engine renders from both Renault and Merc, so any 'analysis' is futile.


Were did I wrote that those pieces will get raced? The most interesting thing is the waste-gate as I did no see that specified in the regs although the lack of VGT made quite likely despite having the MGU-H skimming off the energy. That the turbo will be big has been obvious for a long time. The pics and the renderings are indeed not showing the spec which will get raced but it offers the fan and the media the chance to visualize a great deal of the changes compared to the V8 and the basic configuration of the new power packs. Kudos for that.

#333 onewingedangel

onewingedangel
  • Member

  • 900 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:45

Have to wonder if someone will go for a deliberately oversized turbo kept spooled by the ERS to generate sufficient flow through the wastegate to have a reasonably consistent blowing effect for the diffuser/starter hole.

#334 H2H

H2H
  • Member

  • 2,891 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 28 February 2013 - 11:51

Have to wonder if someone will go for a deliberately oversized turbo kept spooled by the ERS to generate sufficient flow through the wastegate to have a reasonably consistent blowing effect for the diffuser/starter hole.


Well I wrote about the potential 'loophole' called wastegate quite some time ago. It will depend to a good deal on the rules. The FIA might have to be very vigilent as the engineers do not unlearn things and might come up with some fancy stuff in that complex power pack.

Edited by H2H, 28 February 2013 - 11:52.


#335 onewingedangel

onewingedangel
  • Member

  • 900 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:12

Thinking about it, IIRC the 2014 cars will not have starter holes. So if the exhaust and wastegate exit along the car centre line the blowing effect over the floor/top of diffuser would be somewhat limited anyway.

#336 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,463 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:25

I still don't think that is the real turbo for the Renault. It is just a prop for pretty pictures.

#337 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 3,463 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:27

Also, pretty sure that the rules allow only one exhaust outlet - so the wastegate will have to feed back into the exhaust from the turbo, and any benefit will be negligible.

#338 Alolnso

Alolnso
  • Member

  • 34 posts
  • Joined: November 12

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:27

I do trust the boffins to keep raising power output, but 750hp from 100kg/h is 45% thermal efficiency, if I've done the math correctly. Just for reference, 45% is the thermal efficiency target for the 5th generation Prius (Toyota is currently developing the 4th gen for 2015). Even 600hp is 36%, which seems difficult to believe, but perhaps MGU-H and 500bar DI will be more effective than we know.

Call me skeptical, but I think the FIA has already taken some liberties with what the boffins will achieve.


Well, to be fair the F1 engine is only operated in a very specific way, doesn't need to comply with any emission standards, budget limits, constraints due to the fact that the Prius is driven by normal people on normal roads, oil changes every 30,000km, etc.

F1 engines (and racing engines in general) always had a very high specific consumption. It would be really disappointing if the new F1 engines don't have impressive stats.

#339 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 28 February 2013 - 12:40

600 hp, farty single exhaust, 12,000 rpm and driving for fuel economy! F1 is SO EXCITING!


Great.



Advertisement

#340 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,142 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 February 2013 - 13:41

600 hp, farty single exhaust, 12,000 rpm and driving for fuel economy! F1 is SO EXCITING!


Great.

http://www.f1fanatic...s-2014-numbers/

Not quite, the rev. limit was revised to 15000 rpm.

Also don't forget that in addition to the engines they will have 161 bhp on top of that for 33 seconds each lap.

The car weight will increase by 20kg, however with limits on the fuel flow and the increase in efficiency will mean they will start with a lot less fuel than they currently do, so the weight at the start could be even less than now.

The aerodynamic changes to limit bodywork design were also dropped. In the end the performance looks similar to current one.

I could not find anything in the FIA rules which stated that the exhaust had to "fart".  ;)


#341 MadYarpen

MadYarpen
  • Member

  • 3,869 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 28 February 2013 - 13:57

limit is 15k, but I've read that they will anyway run closer to 12k, because they will be more effective then.

#342 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 816 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 February 2013 - 14:13

With so may high performance road cars now exceeding 600bhp, and hypercars considerable more, it is a real shame that F1 cars will now utilise less than their road going brethren.

They can dress it up however they like but 600bhp, + 30 seconds of 160bhp boost, is still a come down from 750bhp + KERS.

The only possible savior is that the torque will be so immense that the tyres will struggle and we'll see less predictable action on the track. But I doubt it. It sounds like the torque curves will be made super smooth by the electronics and Energy Recovery systems to prevent too much of this taking place.





#343 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,142 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 28 February 2013 - 14:45

With so may high performance road cars now exceeding 600bhp, and hypercars considerable more, it is a real shame that F1 cars will now utilise less than their road going brethren.

They can dress it up however they like but 600bhp, + 30 seconds of 160bhp boost, is still a come down from 750bhp + KERS.

The only possible savior is that the torque will be so immense that the tyres will struggle and we'll see less predictable action on the track. But I doubt it. It sounds like the torque curves will be made super smooth by the electronics and Energy Recovery systems to prevent too much of this taking place.

Well, to complicate things they will have an extra forward gear (8th) how will they use that?

The limiting factor on acceleration might be the "fuel flow" limit, but on initial acceleration isn't it the tyres that are the limiting factor? - the same with corners. When do the cars actually need "full power"? I'd guess on straights, but then isn't it the aero efficiency the dominant force on straights?

How much lap-time would be lost if you limited one of todays cars to 600 bhp anyway? would we still see good races?

I don't pretend to know the answers to these questions, but I can see that 2014 could be a fun year (assuming nobody dominates).

#344 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,119 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 February 2013 - 14:49

Well, to complicate things they will have an extra forward gear (8th) how will they use that?


What? I expected these engines to have a wider usable RPM range.

#345 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,685 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 28 February 2013 - 15:46

How much lap-time would be lost if you limited one of todays cars to 600 bhp anyway? would we still see good races?


I've played around with the numbers in the past with physics engines and a current F1 car -150BHP would probably lose 2 seconds per lap.

They'd probably cut back on their use of high downforce wings to compensate for loss in power, to maintain Vmax.

F1 cars in 2006 when they were ~720BHP from the ~920BHP in 2005 dropped by 2.5 seconds, like for like.



#346 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,119 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 28 February 2013 - 16:09

I've played around with the numbers in the past with physics engines and a current F1 car -150BHP would probably lose 2 seconds per lap.

They'd probably cut back on their use of high downforce wings to compensate for loss in power, to maintain Vmax.

F1 cars in 2006 when they were ~720BHP from the ~920BHP in 2005 dropped by 2.5 seconds, like for like.


Weren´t 2006 cars more like 780-800 BHP? Remember they are around 750 BHP now, with 3K max revs less and basically the same engines. Anyway as you say the power loss won´t impact laptimes too badly, the 2005-2006 change is there to show.

#347 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,685 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 28 February 2013 - 16:25

Weren´t 2006 cars more like 780-800 BHP? Remember they are around 750 BHP now, with 3K max revs less and basically the same engines. Anyway as you say the power loss won´t impact laptimes too badly, the 2005-2006 change is there to show.


By the end of the year they might have gotten to over 750BHP but at the start the most common number I saw flying around was 720-740BHP. They started out at around 19000rpm in race trim then slowly creeped to 20,000rpm in race by the end of the year. For 2007 they were rev limited to 19,000rpm.





#348 onewingedangel

onewingedangel
  • Member

  • 900 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 28 February 2013 - 16:29

Weren´t 2006 cars more like 780-800 BHP? Remember they are around 750 BHP now, with 3K max revs less and basically the same engines. Anyway as you say the power loss won´t impact laptimes too badly, the 2005-2006 change is there to show.


They had more revs previous to the engine freeze, but as the 19,000 then 18,000 RPM limits came into force various "reliability" improvements increased rather than decreased peak power outputs, and most engines were made more drivable/less-peaky as well. So comparing an unrestricted 2007 engine to a restricted 2013 engine even with less revs, the 2013 engine would be the better option.

#349 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,688 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 28 February 2013 - 16:44

Well, to complicate things they will have an extra forward gear (8th) how will they use that?


It's a fixed gear ratio for all the races.

#350 uffen

uffen
  • Member

  • 892 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 28 February 2013 - 16:57

Question: If the 600 H.P. engine will bring the car to a max. speed of say 250 km/hr and the extra KERS power will push it to say 280 km/hr (I'm making up numbers here to illustrate the point) what happens when the 33 seconds of KERS boost is gone?
In the situation where to stay ahead of a competitor the driver uses the extra boost a few times, he gets to the long straight and the boost carries him to the 280 km/hr max. All of a sudden his time is up and he is back to 600 H.P. which cannot sustain 280 km/hr. It would be like hitting a wall (of air) and the car will coast down to 250 km/hr. Is this safe? It would be like brake testing someone. The guy behind doesn't know the KERS countdown of the guy ahead.

I know the idea is that the driver should be clever enough to use the KERS in such a way as to avoid running out at the wrong time, I am just wondering about the issue where it is the last lap, or something, and he tries everything to maintain the lead.

Edited by uffen, 28 February 2013 - 16:58.