Funny, I seem to recall there was a time F1 cars need to be "refueled" in order to finish a race...?
How much hp does the V6 produce *without the electric assist*, since we're comparing apples to oranges?
Having regs that are "spec by proxy" makes any referencing to advancing technology moot.
If F1 had truly continued it's lineage relative to road cars (which is, again, an arbitrary notion) it would be all electric.
Of course this will be mocked by the peanut gallery, despite a non-bespoke ROAD CAR - Tesla - being compared in some ways performance wise to a Formula 1 car.
1) With an F1 team budget you could make much lighter motors than a Tesla;
2) The chassis would obviously be much lighter;
3) Wider tires would mean, of course, much more performance than the road car;
4) They wouldn't use plain 18650 batteries. Li-polymer would reduce packaging weight greatly. It would also move the CG even lower.
Compare *that* to the V6 without the electric assist.
The real shame is that the money F1 throws at things, combined with their old-school F1 engineering prowess (NOT hamstrung by bureaucratic status-quo preserving regs) would no doubt make enormous strides in the propulsion and battery side.
WHICH would HAVE A KNOCK-ON EFFECT TO ROAD CARS. And in a way that could drastically change our lives for the better.
The oil industry fears this greatly, and completely explains the fence sitting rubbish propaganda "power units" in F1.
Which is again why I say, embrace 2.5-3l NA V10 at 19,000 rpm, continue to refine that as much as possible......
.....or get with the present.
But comparing *an electrically assisted ICE* to a *Tesla road car* as being "technologically great" is prima facie rubbish.