75 replies to this topic

[V8 Fireworks]

2.2L V6 twin- or single-turbo

750-800hp

Engine lease price of $695,000 per season (bargain!)

Indycar specifies 5 engines per season (which is fine because they are highly reliable)

 

Bernie would be pleased to attract the might of General Motors to F1.  While competition at the Indy500 would be a boon for Mercedes and Ferrari.

 

 

Given the unintended expense and complexity of the hybrid PUs, what better way to go motor racing without the BS than to adopt the sensible, logical, sustainable engine regulation framework of the Indycar series? 

 

 

 

Niiiice 

 

As a bonus, a control XTrac gearbox could also be introduced, to further cut costs.   

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 18 March 2015 - 00:22.

[J2NH]

Does anyone know what the current F1 engine configuration costs?

[V8 Fireworks]

The figures are reported at 20m euros per season (or 10m euro per car).  Whereas the 2.4 V8s were reported to cost 5m euros per season.

[ninetyzero]

Why is it that WEC power trains don't cost as much as F1 despite also being hybrids? Are the rules just written really badly?

[Imateria]

Why is it that WEC power trains don't cost as much as F1 despite also being hybrids? Are the rules just written really badly?

 

Says who? The manufacturers in LMP1 have no customers for those engines so there is no comparison at all and it's well known that Porsche, Toyota, Audi and Nissan all spend quite a bit of money on their LMP1 programs.

 

Also, those 2.4 V8's were heavily subsidised, there actual value was probably close to what the current V6's cost, which is why the talk from the manufacturers of having to factor in development cost with them is pure BS, it clearly wasn't a big issue with the V8's otherwise they wouldnt have accepted them back then so why is it now, I doubt there was an actual dramatic increase in development budget between the two configurations unless they felt the need to spend that extra money.

[Redback]

2.2L V6 twin- or single-turbo

750-800hp

Engine lease price of $695,000 per season (bargain!)

Indycar specifies 5 engines per season (which is fine because they are highly reliable)

 

Bernie would be pleased to attract the might of General Motors to F1.  While competition at the Indy500 would be a boon for Mercedes and Ferrari.

 

I understand where you're coming from and there is some merit in the suggestion.

 

The problem with the current F1 regulations is that on one hand the FIA want "modern" relatively fuel-efficient Hybrid Power Units which are incredibly expensive to design, produce and perfect.  On the other hand, they want cost reduction.  (Whoever thought the two wouldn't be mutually exclusive should try using their second brain cell.)

 

Then, in order to prevent a PU development war and contain costs, they've created an artificial restriction on development that largely prevents any engine manufacturer catching up if they didn't get it right first time.

 

Would an athlete accept some one telling them they're not allowed to train harder to catch the guy who beat them last time? Of course not.

 

Even when Red Bull were dominating, there were no rules in place that prevented other teams from catching up.  Now there are.

 

This token stuff is bullsh*t.

 

I think Mercedes have done a great job and deserve success, but the way the rules are currently implemented is at odds with notion of open competition.

 

F1 should be the pinnacle of engineering and if they want to pretend to be "green", then they should implement a formula that promotes innovation and efficiency.

 

Take a leaf out of WEC's book.  Give them X joules of energy for the race with a maximum energy consumption rate (to prevent qualifying monsters) and leave the rest to the engineers.

 

The PU could be turbo or NA, any number of cylinders, any size, and with any size energy store.  The only restriction is that the PU (batteries excluded) must fit within a "box" of specific physical dimensions and it must have standard pick-up points to enable it to become a stressed chassis member and be adaptable to different chassis.  The PU must be available to multiple teams and at a price not exceeding X dollars/Euros/Pounds, etc.

 

The Indycar engine route addresses some of the issues, but it's still "more of the same" and corrals innovation down a certain (potentially blinkered)  path.

 

I dislike the current restrictive F1 engine formula, but trading it for "just another type of engine" does little for technical advancement or innovation.

Edited by Redback, 18 March 2015 - 08:22.

[teejay]

I am 100000000000000% sure that Bernie would be keen as pie to go to Indycar asking if F1 could have their motors.

[aramos]

Why is it that WEC power trains don't cost as much as F1 despite also being hybrids? Are the rules just written really badly?

 

Its the price of competition. You could build a F1 car cheaply too, but they fight over every tenth. You could probably build an F1 engine with 50 engineers that would be a very good engine, but it would be a second per lap off the current top engines.

[loki]

No

[jonpollak]

Jesus wept

[pacwest]

Whenever I see stuff like this posted I think a few things quietly to myself:

 

1. OP is 14

or

2. OP doesn't understand F1

or

3. OP is new to F1 and will eventually "get it"

or

4. I'm getting too old for this ****

or

5. All of the above

[Kalmake]

Why is it that WEC power trains don't cost as much as F1 despite also being hybrids? Are the rules just written really badly?

WEC championship is worth less, so the manufacturers can't/wont throw as much money at it. Both regs are so open that they could gain some more by spending a lot more.

[sergey1308]

Indycar engine sound is better and it costs less than modern F1.

But I agree with Redback engines must fit some basic restrictions, but in other fields engineers must feel free in inventions and innovations.

[Bloggsworth]

No.

[chrisPB15]

the louder engine in that vid screams "archaic"

I'm already getting used to higher tech higher efiifecvy motors being quieter. If you really need an ego massage, then there's monster trucks.

 

Regarding passing the tech down to road cars, the fastest bike is now an electric motorcycle. Once energy density of batteries is improved (many companies are working on it furiously) it's a no brainer for the avergae motorist. They may as well let F1 do anything they want with ICE, even monster truck engines. Just a shame we can't discuss actual racing these days.

Edited by chrisPB15, 18 March 2015 - 08:24.

[RA2]

 

Teams not in the strategy working group should allowed customer chassis fitted with IndyCar 2.2 V6 engines available from HDP, GM, Cosworth and Judd Fuel adjusted to be on par with the 2nd worst Hybrid engine

 

 

No sooner we will have 13 teams back

Edited by RA2, 18 March 2015 - 08:27.

[P123]

 

Even when Red Bull were dominating, there were no rules in place that prevented other teams from catching up.  Now there are.

 

 

 

I agree, apart from the above.  There was an engine freeze preventing any development of engines except on grounds of reliability.  So the only way to catch up was on aero, but with no track testing, restricted use of wind-tunnels and CFD it wasn't an open house for catching up.

[P123]

The Indycar engines sound great, but that 'sound comparison' video is misleading.  One raw footage, the other mutilated by FOMs sound engineers.  The V8s sounded like crap in onboard footage too.

[V8 Fireworks]

Whenever I see stuff like this posted I think a few things quietly to myself:

 

3. OP is new to F1 and will eventually "get it"

 

 

I notice Hamilton in your avatar.

 

Tell me, how else will Ricciardo's Red Bull have the chance to win races any time soon. 

[thiscocks]

Why dont you just watch a spec series instead of starting a thousand threads on how F1 can be changed to one?

[sergey1308]

Why dont you just watch a spec series instead of starting a thousand threads on how F1 can be changed to one?

Maybe suggestion to adopt IndyCar engine rules is not the best decision to solve current problems, but in generally it's normal to implement some ideas which are used with success in other series to F1.

[SealTheDiffuser]

LOL

[jonpollak]

Is this the same guy that started the "Let's Introduce Restrictor Plates to F1"?

Jp

[Scotracer]

I notice Hamilton in your avatar.

 

Tell me, how else will Ricciardo's Red Bull have the chance to win races any time soon. 

 

When his team get their shit together?

[HoldenRT]

Too many people will see things like this through a prism of self importance and "us vs them" (much like F1 as a whole), therefore would soley see it as a Redbull thing or a Merc thing, or a US vs UK thing.. whatever.

 

Where as, this discussion has going on going for years and years, and while I see many positives to this idea (and ideas like this).. but no F1 would never ever do anything like this.

 

A simple thing like push to pass.. no, we need KERS or DRS.  "Our thing".  "Our different thing".  "Our superior thing".

 

Endless meetings to cut costs.. team after team leaving the sport, but they'll spend millions alone on the pitstop jack to raise the car up.. and then complain of finding it hard to cut costs.

 

F1 is all about elitism and superiority, so the argument of "it works well in the US" is sort of a guarantee that it'll never be used.  It needs to be expensive, it needs to be complicated and have an air of superiority and excess and wastage about it.. then maybe F1 would consider it.

[HoldenRT]

This topic is funny.  It showcases the very "us vs them" thing I was talking about (before reading any replies yet).  It's a small minded narrow window of thinking, where it's just about one team (whichever team you support) wanting to win win win win and not seeing anything else but that.  Which is exactly the same way Bernie is, except instead of win win win, it's money money money. 

 

That's why the rules always get screwed up.  Because it's from these same motivations, where they together and decide the rules.  And then wonder why they aren't working.

 

SO LET'S CHANGE THEM AGAIN!!! YAY!!!

 

Which costs even more money..

[Redback]

I agree, apart from the above.  There was an engine freeze preventing any development of engines except on grounds of reliability.  So the only way to catch up was on aero, but with no track testing, restricted use of wind-tunnels and CFD it wasn't an open house for catching up.

There were some restrictions on Wind-tunnel use but none (I'm aware of) was ever introduced for CFD.  I know it was spoken about, but wasn't it put in the "too hard basket"?

 

Happy to be corrected.

 

Even so, it's not quite the same thing.  A more accurate parallel might be if the FIA had mandated that you could only change say 25% of your aero components from one year to another and none during the season (as was the original intent for PUs this year).

 

That would have locked-in Red Bull's advantage in the same way that Mercedes advantage is locked-in now and it too would have been a damaging move for the sport.

[stewie]

It's probably simpler for all involved just to watch indycars this year over f1 ;-)

[thiscocks]

Is this the same guy that started the "Let's Introduce Restrictor Plates to F1"?

Jp

yep! LOL

[V8 Fireworks]

There were some restrictions on Wind-tunnel use but none (I'm aware of) was ever introduced for CFD.  I know it was spoken about, but wasn't it put in the "too hard basket"?

 

 

No.  Teams were providing with a sliding scale of wind tunnel (hour) and CFD usage (in teraflop hours).  They could choose more wind tunnel, or more CFD.  With the "grand total" of both reduced every season.

 

Hence teams need to be more efficient in the way they use wind tunnel or computing power.

[V8 Fireworks]

yep! LOL

 

Damn straight, it's a free discussion forum after all.

[thiscocks]

So I hope you are now aware they already run engine power restrictors 

[Gyno]

Those Indycar engines SOUNDS  GREAT compared to what F1 have.

 

I think F1 should have gone with 3.0L V6 Twin turbo.

Make it cheap, it's just an engine, no need to go all fancy with expencive materials.

Old style KERS, driver operated but with MORE POWER.

 

They could make an engine that produces 750bhp real easy that is cheap and a KERS unit that produces 150bhp for 6 seconds a lap.

 

Would Sound Great and give lots of power for a fraction of what todays engines cost.

Ditch the stupid fuel limit and allow refueling.

 

The REAL racing Fans doesn't care about the green tech that F1 is trying to showcase.

It's like if TOP GEAR change their hosts and the new ones only does eco crap and boring car reviews.

No one is gonna watch that crap.

[Fastcake]

I can't see how the Indycar engines would make anyone happy.

And a spec gearbox? Who wants that?

[AustinF1]

It's sad that an IndyCar engine now sounds better than an F1 engine. That same engine used to sound puny in comparison to an F1 engine.

[jonpollak]

It's probably simpler for all involved just to watch indycars this year over f1 ;-)

Even though I hate doing this...Time for me to quote myself

 

 

Load up the UNHCR trucks, blankets, crates of water, tents and everything on that C-5M cargo plane.

Looks like we gonna get a big ass wave of refugees over to our neck of the woods.

 

Jp

 

 

[Tourgott]

All this **** has to stop. Go back to V8 and everyone - except Mercedes - will be happy. Even Honda!

[V8 Fireworks]

And a spec gearbox? Who wants that?

 

Marussia, Caterham etc were quite happy to run an off-the-shelf spec gearbox. 

 

http://www.xtrac.com...ter/product/110

 

"Fancy" F1 teams are too picky 

[Fastcake]

Marussia, Caterham etc were quite happy to run an off-the-shelf spec gearbox.

http://www.xtrac.com...ter/product/110

"Fancy" F1 teams are too picky

The three new teams brought a cheap gearbox from a supplier, that was reputedly not as good as the bespoke units designed by F1 teams. They weren't forced to run it, and neither should they be.

[johnmhinds]

I can't see how the Indycar engines would make anyone happy.

And a spec gearbox? Who wants that?

 

I'm not saying spec parts are a good thing for F1, but how would having a spec gearbox change anything for the viewers? 

 

The fans never get to see what is going on with these fancy engines (FOM on screen graphics being as useless as ever) so what was the point in spending 4-5x more on them?

 

And before anyone says it, no engine manufacturers don't use F1 to test engines to develop future technology for their road cars, you can't test **** when you can only use a dozen engines a year.

Edited by johnmhinds, 18 March 2015 - 14:30.

[Gyno]

I'm not saying having spec parts are a good things for F1, but how would having a spec gearbox change anything for the viewers? 

 

The fans never get to see what is going on with these fancy engines (FOM on screen graphics being as useless as ever) so what was the point in spending 4-5x more on them?

 

And before anyone says it, no engine manufacturers don't use F1 to test engines to develop future technology for their road cars, you can't test **** when you can only use a dozen engines a year.

 

 

The road cars technology is light years ahead of F1 technology when it comes to what they Labeled as ECO green tech.

It's should be called Earth killing tech.

 

Who cares about the gearboxes if they are spec or not.

Now they have to run with the same gear ratios all year long either way so why not just give them a spec box?

 

KERS was something I liked as it was driver operated and not computer controlled.

Cuttent PU needs to be thrown out with the garbage.

[learningtobelost]

All this **** has to stop. Go back to V8 and everyone - except Mercedes - will be happy. Even Honda!

 

Ferrari are also happy with the current regulations... and Renault have said that they want to stay the course with this forumula, rather than go for massive changes.  

Really, it's only miserable folks on internet forums and Christian Horner that would be happy going back to the old V8s. 

[Tourgott]

Ferrari are also happy with the current regulations... and Renault have said that they want to stay the course with this forumula, rather than go for massive changes.  

Really, it's only miserable folks on internet forums and Christian Horner that would be happy going back to the old V8s. 

 

I highly doubt Ferrari is "happy" with a third place. Maybe not that "unhappy" like last year but certainly not "happy".

And Renault is for sure not happy. Their image is getting worse and worse. The only guy who defends the V6 is Remi Taffin. But he has to. Otherwise he would lose his job.

 

Going back to V8 would make a lot of people happy:

- (Small) Teams

- Promoters

- Fans

- Drivers

- TV stations

- Sponsors

- Bernie

 

Actually anybody except for Toto and Niki.

Edited by Tourgott, 18 March 2015 - 16:28.

[Fastcake]

I'm not saying spec parts are a good thing for F1, but how would having a spec gearbox change anything for the viewers? 

 

The fans never get to see what is going on with these fancy engines (FOM on screen graphics being as useless as ever) so what was the point in spending 4-5x more on them?

 

And before anyone says it, no engine manufacturers don't use F1 to test engines to develop future technology for their road cars, you can't test **** when you can only use a dozen engines a year.

 

Well you could extend that argument to every part of the car apart from the bodywork. It's all invisible to the viewer. 

 

That's not really the F1 that most people want though.

[johnmhinds]

Well you could extend that argument to every part of the car apart from the bodywork. It's all invisible to the viewer. 

 

That's not really the F1 that most people want though.

 

I agree that most F1 fans wouldn't want spec cars.

 

But there were ways to write the rules so that the regulations limited the costs of the components so that smaller teams could survive on lower budgets.

 

The current engine regulations revolve around the top teams using the most expensive engine designs they could think up, during period where the smaller teams were trying to lower their budgets to sustainable levels.

 

It's like the top teams have no care for what the sport will be like in a couple of years once they are the only ones left.

[AustinF1]

I agree that most F1 fans wouldn't want spec cars.

 

But there were ways to write the rules so that the regulations limited the costs of the components so that smaller teams could survive on lower budgets.

 

The current engine regulations revolve around the top teams using the most expensive engine designs they could think up, during period where the smaller teams were trying to lower their budgets to sustainable levels.

 

It's like the top teams have no care for what the sport will be like in a couple of years once they are the only ones left.

Exactly. It's like I keep asking my buddy, why can't the top teams see that running off the backmarkers hurts them too in the long run? Run off enough backmarkers and pretty soon you're the backmarker.

 

I guess they're just counting on always being able to recruit new teams. Not sure that's a wise strategy.

[Fastcake]

I agree that most F1 fans wouldn't want spec cars.

 

But there were ways to write the rules so that the regulations limited the costs of the components so that smaller teams could survive on lower budgets.

 

The current engine regulations revolve around the top teams using the most expensive engine designs they could think up, during period where the smaller teams were trying to lower their budgets to sustainable levels.

 

It's like the top teams have no care for what the sport will be like in a couple of years once they are the only ones left.

 

Of course, but this is probably veering off from using Indycar engines in F1.

[learningtobelost]

I highly doubt Ferrari is "happy" with a third place. Maybe not that "unhappy" like last year but certainly not "happy".

And Renault is for sure not happy. Their image is getting worse and worse. The only guy who defends the V6 is Remi Taffin. But he has to. Otherwise he would lose his job.

 

 

Not to let facts get in the way, but Ferrari and Renault have both stated that they wish to stay with the current engine Formula.  In fact, just last week Renault stated that they did not want big upheavals in the engine rules and that they favoured minor tweaks to the current regulations. 

[Tourgott]

Not to let facts get in the way, but Ferrari and Renault have both stated that they wish to stay with the current engine Formula. In fact, just last week Renault stated that they did not want big upheavals in the engine rules and that they favoured minor tweaks to the current regulations.

Last week was before the Melbourne disaster though.

[Radoye]

2.2L V6 twin- or single-turbo
750-800hp
Engine lease price of $695,000 per season (bargain!)
Indycar specifies 5 engines per season (which is fine because they are highly reliable)

http://www.roadandtr...r-engines-2014/

 

Stated HP Rating (Speedway / 1.5-mile Oval / Road Course): 575 HP / 625 HP / 675 HP

 

 

Those Indy engine is in the GP2 ballpark. Imagine the moaning on the forums if these would be adopted for F1.