Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 4 votes

2021 engine formula: political wrangling, technical details, aesthetics...


  • Please log in to reply
4132 replies to this topic

Poll: Pick and choose! (466 member(s) have cast votes)

Extra 3000rpm?

  1. Yay (422 votes [90.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 90.56%

  2. Nay (44 votes [9.44%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 9.44%

More prescriptive engine design, standard energy store etc

  1. Yay (242 votes [51.93%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 51.93%

  2. Nay (224 votes [48.07%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 48.07%

Removing MGU-H, more tactical use of MGU-K

  1. Yay (348 votes [74.68%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 74.68%

  2. Nay (118 votes [25.32%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.32%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#3501 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,662 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 January 2019 - 20:35

F1 has to go electric if it wants to be relevant to manufacturers. 

Might not even be just for that reason. In a world increasingly turning against fossil fuels and towards sustainability, sponsors and investors are as important as well. You have the triad of manufacturers no longer seeing it as relevant, sponsors (as a general rule) not wanting to be associated with a carbon emitting waste of the Earth's resources and investors not having the confidence to put their money into it for the two preceding reasons. Will the traditional fans who want petrol racing to continue (an ageing demographic anyway) paying for tickets and streaming subscriptions be enough to keep up the money needed to run Formula One as we know it? I doubt it. 

 

Of course, there will be cultural differences in the rate that this happens and as such will be different for different series and regions. But I see a slow slide in this direction from which F1 only has two options - go electric or greatly downsize in both global importance and expenditure. 


Edited by Ben1445, 24 January 2019 - 20:37.


Advertisement

#3502 RacingGreen

RacingGreen
  • Member

  • 2,376 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 24 January 2019 - 21:26

.......... But, if it does, it won't be F1.

 

Interesting point of view that got me thinking. "What is F1 anyway?"  For me any changes have to keep a few "non-negotiables."  It has to be single-seater prototypes, open wheel, open cockpit, and be the fastest racing for that type of vehicle. Actually I'm not 100% sure about open cockpit as some artists impressions of "cars of the future" with cockpits look much nicer than what we have now with halos. Anyway the petrol vs electric issue really isn't a game breaker for me. Sure I have a strong preference for loud internal combustion engines but must admit Formula E is growing on me and if the day comes for F1 to follow suit I'm sure I'll still watch.



#3503 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 24 January 2019 - 21:27

Maybe not on range.

But then again, a truck's range is often not the limiting factor. That is, there often is a regulatory limit for which a driver can drive before requiring a rest/meal break, by legislation.

 

eg: "In the United States, the hours of service (HOS) of commercial drivers are regulated by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). Commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers are limited to 11 cumulative hours driving in a 14-hour period, following a rest period of no less than 10 consecutive hours. Drivers employed by carriers in "daily operation" may not work more than 70 hours within any period of 8 consecutive days."

https://en.wikipedia...r#United_States

 

Which would suggest that a truck with a 1,000 mile range can't be driven to the end of its range in a day. 

 

Tesla's 500 mile range truck could possibly fulfill the 11 hour day, with battery charge top ups during breaks. 

 

No.  Many trucks are driven by two person teams.  All the longer cabs you see have a sleeper in back.  They can legally travel 22 hours per day up to the limit but many drive 20 hours per day for seven days and then take a one day layover.  It is easy to put on 5,000 miles per week and sometimes up to 8,000.  Many trucks can go over 2,000 miles before refueling.  Battery trucks can't keep up, their is no time for any charging.



#3504 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 24 January 2019 - 21:34

Once upon a time petrol cars were expensive, expensive to operate, didn't have range and had limited locations where you could fill up the tank.

 

This is true - but back then the alternative was horses so it was not difficult for petrol cars to gain advantages over the range and speed of the competition.

 

In the world today the alternative to electric cars is petrol cars.  Petrol cars have great range and speed so it is much harder for electric cars to have an advantage over the competition.  You have to consider the current competition.



#3505 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 7,413 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 24 January 2019 - 21:59

Interesting point of view that got me thinking. "What is F1 anyway?"  For me any changes have to keep a few "non-negotiables."  It has to be single-seater prototypes, open wheel, open cockpit, and be the fastest racing for that type of vehicle. Actually I'm not 100% sure about open cockpit as some artists impressions of "cars of the future" with cockpits look much nicer than what we have now with halos. Anyway the petrol vs electric issue really isn't a game breaker for me. Sure I have a strong preference for loud internal combustion engines but must admit Formula E is growing on me and if the day comes for F1 to follow suit I'm sure I'll still watch.

 

I really don't believe that petrol will ever be matched, let alone beaten. That's what I mean. Racing will not be the same as it is now because they will not be able to make cars that can match.



#3506 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,662 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 January 2019 - 22:02

This is true - but back then the alternative was horses so it was not difficult for petrol cars to gain advantages over the range and speed of the competition.
 
In the world today the alternative to electric cars is petrol cars.  Petrol cars have great range and speed so it is much harder for electric cars to have an advantage over the competition.  You have to consider the current competition.

Think the tone was more that 'as petrol cars have shown, this can all change' rather than anything else.
 

I think your pronouncement of the death of fossil fuels is greatly exaggerated.

I have to say it, so: That entirely depends on your definition of 'death'. By most accounts, we are at the start of a (currently) slow but inevitable transition away from fossil fuels. The speed and end date of that is completely unknown and will depend on years and years of as yet un-lived political wrangling and science/engineering effort. 

 

So, when is the death point? Is it when the world realised it needed to end fossil fuel use? Is it when growth of fossil fuels started to slow or even reverse? Is it when it's reduced to 10% of today's levels? Or is it when the last drop of fossil fuel is burned for good? 

 

My point is that this is a slightly subjective matter. To some, the 'death' point has already been reached, to others is is still decades away. It's worth remembering that because it helps both sides understand what may appear as out-of-touch statements when they're actually seeing the same set of facts just from slightly different viewpoints. 



#3507 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 24 January 2019 - 22:14

I have to say it, so: That entirely depends on your definition of 'death'. By most accounts, we are at the start of a (currently) slow but inevitable transition away from fossil fuels. The speed and end date of that is completely unknown and will depend on years and years of as yet un-lived political wrangling and science/engineering effort. 

 

So, when is the death point? Is it when the world realised it needed to end fossil fuel use? Is it when growth of fossil fuels started to slow or even reverse? Is it when it's reduced to 10% of today's levels? Or is it when the last drop of fossil fuel is burned for good? 

 

My point is that this is a slightly subjective matter. To some, the 'death' point has already been reached, to others is is still decades away. It's worth remembering that because it helps both sides understand what may appear as out-of-touch statements when they're actually seeing the same set of facts just from slightly different viewpoints. 

 

I agree with you.  It was Fatgadget that said the future of petrol is zero - I don't agree with that.  It will be a very long time before some factions are able to abandon fossil fuels.  The military might very well be one of the last.  I just can't see any electric version of a fighter jet being competitive - prop planes don't have anywhere near the performance.



#3508 Vielleicht

Vielleicht
  • Member

  • 3,681 posts
  • Joined: June 16

Posted 24 January 2019 - 22:15

I really don't believe that petrol will ever be matched, let alone beaten. That's what I mean. Racing will not be the same as it is now because they will not be able to make cars that can match.

I'll keep saying this, to no one in particular, becasue I firmly believe it:

 

In order to 'beat' petrol, in this day in age, a replacement for petrol does not actually have to be faster, longer lasting, cheaper or even more convenient. That's becuase the metrics of what we consider to be good, and their relative importance, are changing. Realistically, it just has to be close enough in those areas to not turn society on it's head and, more crucially, not be damaging to the environment.

 

If that means racing has to change, that may be how it's going to have to be. To me, even if we aren't ever breaking lap records set by ICE racers, as long as we're moving in a zero carbon direction it will always be better*.

 

*I respect that some folks will fundamentally disagree.



#3509 RacingGreen

RacingGreen
  • Member

  • 2,376 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 24 January 2019 - 22:23

I really don't believe that petrol will ever be matched, let alone beaten. That's what I mean. Racing will not be the same as it is now because they will not be able to make cars that can match.

 

Well I guess, in terms of emotional attachment to the cars, the visceral sound of a petrol engine alone is enough to make me agree with you.



#3510 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,662 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 24 January 2019 - 22:29

I agree with you.  It was Fatgadget that said the future of petrol is zero - I don't agree with that.  It will be a very long time before some factions are able to abandon fossil fuels.  The military might very well be one of the last.  I just can't see any electric version of a fighter jet being competitive - prop planes don't have anywhere near the performance.

You are probably right. In fact, if enough civilian environmental progress is made, the complete abandonment of fossil fuels might never be required.

 

The longer we take to kick the habit, the more I am unwilling to rule out the situation in the future getting so desperate that even the use of fossil fuels for things we might deem as utterly essential today would not justify the damage to the environment. Call me an alarmist if you like and say 'it won't get to that' but to my mind we must consider the possibility and try to avoid it. Else we guarantee the unthinkable. 



#3511 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 24 January 2019 - 23:47

You are probably right. In fact, if enough civilian environmental progress is made, the complete abandonment of fossil fuels might never be required.

 

The longer we take to kick the habit, the more I am unwilling to rule out the situation in the future getting so desperate that even the use of fossil fuels for things we might deem as utterly essential today would not justify the damage to the environment. Call me an alarmist if you like and say 'it won't get to that' but to my mind we must consider the possibility and try to avoid it. Else we guarantee the unthinkable. 

 

You are an alarmist.         (Well, you said...)

 

Since I live up north I was all in favor of 'global warming', and then they went and changed it to 'climate change'.  Well the earth's climate has been changing since it was a molten ball 4.5 billion years ago and it ain't gonna stop changing now.  You have probably heard of 'ice ages'.  There have been at least five of them and there will be another one.  In between each one is a warmer period.  An ice age would be pretty terrible for humans so if we can delay it somewhat that might be a good thing.



#3512 Kalmake

Kalmake
  • Member

  • 3,047 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 25 January 2019 - 09:11

It's the rate of change that is the problem. If a thread goes off topic gradually, most people wont even notice.



#3513 thegforcemaybewithyou

thegforcemaybewithyou
  • Member

  • 2,857 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 25 January 2019 - 09:30

Preliminary results from a poll on F1 Fanvoice with 300 votes currently. It doesn't give the complete range as the engine formats prior to 89 aren't listed.

 

C9uPqC3.png



#3514 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 25 January 2019 - 09:39

It's the rate of change that is the problem. If a thread goes off topic gradually, most people wont even notice.

:clap:



#3515 sgtkate

sgtkate
  • Member

  • 247 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 25 January 2019 - 09:54

Preliminary results from a poll on F1 Fanvoice with 300 votes currently. It doesn't give the complete range as the engine formats prior to 89 aren't listed.

 

C9uPqC3.png

 

Unfortunately polls like that will end up being skewed by how good the racing was which may or may not be related to the engine. I can understand why people aren't keen on the new hybrid engines as they add a layer of complexity that makes the sport less accessible to it's prime audience as well as being less noisy (which I actually don't mind having been to Silverstone during 3 different engine eras! They are still loud enough to hurt your ears).



#3516 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,449 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 25 January 2019 - 11:02

Preliminary results from a poll on F1 Fanvoice with 300 votes currently. It doesn't give the complete range as the engine formats prior to 89 aren't listed.

 

C9uPqC3.png

 

Heretics! The crippled V8 above the glorious 3,5 V12? No way.



#3517 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,123 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2019 - 11:10

Heretics! The crippled V8 above the glorious 3,5 V12? No way.




I think this is a matter of a number of voters being so young that they never heard those overrated pieces of inefficiency....


Edit: Opinion based on the rate of succes in victories as well as won world titles against other engine cofigurations which are rated as less glorious....

Edited by Henri Greuter, 25 January 2019 - 11:27.


#3518 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 7,413 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2019 - 13:28

I'll keep saying this, to no one in particular, becasue I firmly believe it:

 

In order to 'beat' petrol, in this day in age, a replacement for petrol does not actually have to be faster, longer lasting, cheaper or even more convenient. That's becuase the metrics of what we consider to be good, and their relative importance, are changing. Realistically, it just has to be close enough in those areas to not turn society on it's head and, more crucially, not be damaging to the environment.

 

If that means racing has to change, that may be how it's going to have to be. To me, even if we aren't ever breaking lap records set by ICE racers, as long as we're moving in a zero carbon direction it will always be better*.

 

*I respect that some folks will fundamentally disagree.

 

That is exactly my point. I fully believe that petrol is going to diminish to niche whereas electric is going to go on to dominate. But I cannot accept that electric will ever perform better. It's simply that, for many reasons which have nothing to do with superiority of even 'greenness' , electric has been chosen to be the future and we mere mortals cannot stop that.



#3519 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,449 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 25 January 2019 - 13:49

I think this is a matter of a number of voters being so young that they never heard those overrated pieces of inefficiency....


Edit: Opinion based on the rate of succes in victories as well as won world titles against other engine cofigurations which are rated as less glorious....

 

Inefficient? They only needed 16 races to determine who won, while we now need 21 for that.  :p



Advertisement

#3520 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 7,413 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2019 - 13:50

Preliminary results from a poll on F1 Fanvoice with 300 votes currently. It doesn't give the complete range as the engine formats prior to 89 aren't listed.

 

C9uPqC3.png

 

What happened to the '80s, the '70s, the 60's? The question should read "Which one of these is your favourite?"



#3521 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,662 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 25 January 2019 - 13:56

That is exactly my point. I fully believe that petrol is going to diminish to niche whereas electric is going to go on to dominate. But I cannot accept that electric will ever perform better. It's simply that, for many reasons which have nothing to do with superiority of even 'greenness' , electric has been chosen to be the future and we mere mortals cannot stop that.

Care to enlighten us on said reasons? 



#3522 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,123 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2019 - 14:01

Inefficient? They only needed 16 races to determine who won, while we now need 21 for that.  :p


Hahaha...

What I meant of course is how many races and world titels were won by V12s in that era?

Backed up aptly by 12cylinder contraptions like:

Porsche V12
Lamborghini V12
Subari Motori Moderni Flat 12
Life W12
MGN W12

Do I overlook another of those gloriously "successfull" contenders with more than 10 cylinders of that era?

#3523 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,449 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 25 January 2019 - 14:49

They feared the v12 (and the prospect of Honda or Toyota entering F1 with one) enough to get it banned end nineties. A real shame. 



#3524 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,123 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2019 - 15:06

They feared the v12 (and the prospect of Honda or Toyota entering F1 with one) enough to get it banned end nineties. A real shame.



We were talking about the 3.5 liter era as far as I remember.....
But then anyway....


The atmo era in its wildest state was expensive enough as it was to cut off certain areas of development in order to avoid another spending war for nothing...

People are complaining about the expensive hybrid engines but those extreme fast revving atmos and the development of those made them also rediculously expensive per piece.
(Conveniently forgotten by the atmo fans BTW)

Edited by Henri Greuter, 25 January 2019 - 15:08.


#3525 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,449 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 25 January 2019 - 15:15

You did get 200 engines for that money instead of just a few now. ;) That has been discussed to death though, don't want to go there.



#3526 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 7,413 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2019 - 15:15

Care to enlighten us on said reasons? 

 

Well, briefly, Governments want to be seen to be doing something about human-caused climate change. They do not want to adopt proper measures because this would cause economic hardship throughout the developed world. Cars using fossil fuels are a good target. Electric cars are the chosen solution, but they all need Lithium batteries and a source of electricity to keep charging them. I would go on, but it's really getting off topic.


Edited by pdac, 25 January 2019 - 15:17.


#3527 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 25 January 2019 - 15:20

They feared the v12 (and the prospect of Honda or Toyota entering F1 with one) enough to get it banned end nineties. A real shame. 

 

More correctly, they feared the costs developing new V12s and possibly needing different engines for different circuits. It was unlikely that Toyota would have developed a V12 that would undo the advantages the V10 had already proven.



#3528 taran

taran
  • Member

  • 2,904 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 January 2019 - 15:25

This is true - but back then the alternative was horses so it was not difficult for petrol cars to gain advantages over the range and speed of the competition.

 

In the world today the alternative to electric cars is petrol cars.  Petrol cars have great range and speed so it is much harder for electric cars to have an advantage over the competition.  You have to consider the current competition.

 

It will be only a matter of time before petrol cars will be banned from cities to reduce pollution. That is the only advantage electric cars will need. Once that starts happening, the technical advantages of petrol cars will not help them....

You can already see this happening with the diesel cars.

They offer many advantages over petrol cars but since the diesel scandal and stricter (local) emission laws, sales have heavily declined or collapsed depending on who you listen to....



#3529 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,123 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2019 - 15:26

You did get 200 engines for that money instead of just a few now.  ;) That has been discussed to death though, don't want to go there.


OK, I'm fine with that.

#3530 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 25 January 2019 - 16:51

It will be only a matter of time before petrol cars will be banned from cities to reduce pollution. That is the only advantage electric cars will need. Once that starts happening, the technical advantages of petrol cars will not help them....

You can already see this happening with the diesel cars.

They offer many advantages over petrol cars but since the diesel scandal and stricter (local) emission laws, sales have heavily declined or collapsed depending on who you listen to....

 

Eventually people will figure out that electric cars only reduce overall pollution if their energy source is less polluting than the petrol cars.  Many people charge there electric cars at night when the electricity production is the most polluting.  There is no solar energy on the grid at night and the wind energy is greatly reduced at night.  Hydro power is still great at night but much of the night energy comes from more polluting energy sources like coal.  So in effect electric cars move the pollution out of the cities to the location of the power plant.  That is good enough for some people but when you look at the big picture it isn't doing as much good for the planet as they are led to believe.

 

Also there is the cost factor.  As more and more electric vehicles are used eventually the demand for electricity will go up and the demand for petrol will go down.  This will lead to higher prices for electricity and lower prices for petrol.  Electric cars are already more expensive to buy and they will become more expensive to operate as the price of electricity goes up.  This could lead to a situation where petrol cars become cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate.  This would be good for people that need the longer range of petrol cars.


Edited by nonobaddog, 25 January 2019 - 16:51.


#3531 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 7,413 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 25 January 2019 - 18:03

Eventually people will figure out that electric cars only reduce overall pollution if their energy source is less polluting than the petrol cars.  Many people charge there electric cars at night when the electricity production is the most polluting.  There is no solar energy on the grid at night and the wind energy is greatly reduced at night.  Hydro power is still great at night but much of the night energy comes from more polluting energy sources like coal.  So in effect electric cars move the pollution out of the cities to the location of the power plant.  That is good enough for some people but when you look at the big picture it isn't doing as much good for the planet as they are led to believe.

 

Also there is the cost factor.  As more and more electric vehicles are used eventually the demand for electricity will go up and the demand for petrol will go down.  This will lead to higher prices for electricity and lower prices for petrol.  Electric cars are already more expensive to buy and they will become more expensive to operate as the price of electricity goes up.  This could lead to a situation where petrol cars become cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate.  This would be good for people that need the longer range of petrol cars.

 

As I've stated many times (and people seem to be picking up on now), I doubt personally-owned electric vehicles is what is on the cards. I think the long term plan (and that's not a long long way away) is for large corporations to own fleets of vehicles and they will send one to you within a very short time of you requesting one. That vehicle will be autonomous - ordinary people will not be able to drive on public roads in future.



#3532 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 25 January 2019 - 18:25

As I've stated many times (and people seem to be picking up on now), I doubt personally-owned electric vehicles is what is on the cards. I think the long term plan (and that's not a long long way away) is for large corporations to own fleets of vehicles and they will send one to you within a very short time of you requesting one. That vehicle will be autonomous - ordinary people will not be able to drive on public roads in future.

 

That's rubbish. People will always want personal vehicles that they own, or at least have exclusive use of, themselves. That may be the plan for companies like Uber, but it's not going to appeal to the general public. The vehicles might still be autonomous, but they'll be private.



#3533 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,264 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 25 January 2019 - 18:30

It will be only a matter of time before petrol cars will be banned from cities to reduce pollution. That is the only advantage electric cars will need. Once that starts happening, the technical advantages of petrol cars will not help them....

You can already see this happening with the diesel cars.

They offer many advantages over petrol cars but since the diesel scandal and stricter (local) emission laws, sales have heavily declined or collapsed depending on who you listen to....

:lol: Come up here and tell that to some one when it is -25 to -35 F below zero, common temps. up here; as I write this it is -4 F and the next three days will be a lot colder..

People are still alive because after their car broke down or got stuck in a blizzard they ran their engine on and off for heat  till help arrived; I wonder how many hours batteries will keep a car above freezing.

Electrics up here will only be toy foo-foo cars for those with more money than brains, or grocery getter town cars in large urban areas. :lol:



#3534 Boing Ball

Boing Ball
  • Member

  • 301 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 25 January 2019 - 18:31

Heretics! The crippled V8 above the glorious 3,5 V12? No way.

 

 

Polls like this measure when people started watching F1. After all, some of those people put the rev-limited nano V8s above the 3l V10s as well. 



#3535 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,123 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 25 January 2019 - 18:59

You did get 200 engines for that money instead of just a few now.  ;) That has been discussed to death though, don't want to go there.

 

 

OK, I'm fine with that.

 

 

Sorry to get back to this one last time but.....

 

you mentioned 200 engines then vs a few nowadays for that money. But of course we don't know how many different prototype and evo versions are built up and make endless hours on dynos and other test benches to gather enough data to decide on the final specs, versions, etc for the components that eventually end up in the few engines built up that will eventually see service during the actual GP weekends.



#3536 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,049 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 25 January 2019 - 19:24

Sorry to get back to this one last time but.....

you mentioned 200 engines then vs a few nowadays for that money. But of course we don't know how many different prototype and evo versions are built up and make endless hours on dynos and other test benches to gather enough data to decide on the final specs, versions, etc for the components that eventually end up in the few engines built up that will eventually see service during the actual GP weekends.

As wind tunnel testing etc are restricted, maybe its time the same is extended to engine testing.

#3537 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 25 January 2019 - 19:40

Sorry to get back to this one last time but.....

 

you mentioned 200 engines then vs a few nowadays for that money. But of course we don't know how many different prototype and evo versions are built up and make endless hours on dynos and other test benches to gather enough data to decide on the final specs, versions, etc for the components that eventually end up in the few engines built up that will eventually see service during the actual GP weekends.

 

And of course we don't know how many different prototype and evo versions are built up and make endless hours on dynos and other test benches to gather enough data to decide on the final specs, versions, etc for the components that eventually end up in the 200 engines built up that will eventually see service during the actual GP weekends.



#3538 RacingGreen

RacingGreen
  • Member

  • 2,376 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 25 January 2019 - 20:03

Care to enlighten us on said reasons? 

 

 

Well, briefly, Governments want to be seen to be doing something about human-caused climate change. They do not want to adopt proper measures because this would cause economic hardship throughout the developed world. Cars using fossil fuels are a good target. Electric cars are the chosen solution, but they all need Lithium batteries and a source of electricity to keep charging them. I would go on, but it's really getting off topic.

 

As I've pointed out before Lithium based technology is a band aid solution, as anyone could see with a basic back of the envelope calculation:

 

According to the USGS we have 365 years reserves of lithium at current production levels ( approx 37,000 metric tons a year.) That is all uses not just car batteries. Car Batteries are projected to be around 8,000 tons by 2020 (about 2% of cars sales.)
 
Switching to 100% of cars being electric would therefore need 400,000 metric tons of lithium. Doubling their range and increasing home lithium storage to charge them by solar panels on your roof lets say a total of 800,000 (just for the sake of estimating something.) That brings World lithium reserves down to 17 years.
 
That's how long this style of electric car future is going to last. Replacing lithium with some other non-renewable battery technology will also run into the same problem of finite resources. 
 
As for F1, well it appears that the world is intent on using up it's Lithium reserves in exactly the same way it is rapidly using up it's petroleum, so I suppose if it is going to switch to a Lithium based electric technology it had better do so soon before the stuff runs out!

Edited by RacingGreen, 25 January 2019 - 20:05.


#3539 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,676 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 26 January 2019 - 00:01

That's rubbish. People will always want personal vehicles that they own, or at least have exclusive use of, themselves. That may be the plan for companies like Uber, but it's not going to appeal to the general public. The vehicles might still be autonomous, but they'll be private.

 

I believe that personal car ownership rates are declining in countries like the US.

 

It is likely that children born today will never own a car, and may never have a driver's licence.



Advertisement

#3540 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 7,413 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 26 January 2019 - 00:01

That's rubbish. People will always want personal vehicles that they own, or at least have exclusive use of, themselves. That may be the plan for companies like Uber, but it's not going to appeal to the general public. The vehicles might still be autonomous, but they'll be private.

 

It will happen. People used to want to buy CD's but many are now happy to subscribe to a streaming service. Already many in the cities, especially younger people are happy not to have a car. That will only get more normal when insurance continues to rise and when governments start to make petrol scarce and expensive - which will happen once the alternative is established.

 

Like a lot of things, businesses and governments will promote a new way of doing things and people will start to adopt it. Once sufficient numbers have adopted it willingly, disincentives to continue with the old ways will start to appear and more people will adopt the new idea. Eventually, most will be doing things the new way and governments will then start to restrict or ban the old ways.

 

Like it or not, sooner rather than later I will be getting a water meter installed. I don't want one. I don't believe it will save me money or make my life easier in the long run, but I will be obliged to take one because it will be forced upon me. Same thing with cars, I think.



#3541 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 26 January 2019 - 00:57

The CD vs streaming thing has nothing to do with cars - same with the water meter thing which I don't understand what you are even implying.

Your views on cars are nothing like what I see happening around here.



#3542 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,676 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 26 January 2019 - 00:58

Eventually people will figure out that electric cars only reduce overall pollution if their energy source is less polluting than the petrol cars.  Many people charge there electric cars at night when the electricity production is the most polluting.


Electric cars produce less emissions when powered by coal-fired power plants than petrol cars do.
 

Power plants operate at higher efficiency than most car engines. Electricity transmission is quite efficient, battery charging and discharging is quite efficient and electric motors are very efficient.

 

There is no solar energy on the grid at night and the wind energy is greatly reduced at night.  Hydro power is still great at night but much of the night energy comes from more polluting energy sources like coal.  So in effect electric cars move the pollution out of the cities to the location of the power plant.  That is good enough for some people but when you look at the big picture it isn't doing as much good for the planet as they are led to believe.


Concentrating thermal solar power plants can store energy and produce power 24/7.

 

Wind power is also a thing, and that does not stop at night.
 
 Some parts of the world use geothermal energy, while wave and tidal energy may be used for large scale power production in the future. Tidal energy has been used in the past - London Bridge had several water wheels, driven by the Thames tide, to pump water uphill to storage. Another wheel may have been used for driving a flour mill. That was about 500 years ago.

 

Also there is the cost factor.  As more and more electric vehicles are used eventually the demand for electricity will go up and the demand for petrol will go down.  This will lead to higher prices for electricity and lower prices for petrol.  Electric cars are already more expensive to buy and they will become more expensive to operate as the price of electricity goes up.  This could lead to a situation where petrol cars become cheaper to buy and cheaper to operate.  This would be good for people that need the longer range of petrol cars.


Electricity cost will go up if supply is not increased to match demand. That is unlikely to happen in the long term.

 

The biggest single sector for greenhouse gas emissions is electricity generation. That is why much of the effort in mitigating climate change is aimed at that sector.

 

We are now at the stage where new capacity is cheaper (per MWh) for wind and solar PV than for fossil-fuel thermal plants. Solar thermal isn't quite there yet.

 

Petrol will become cheaper if production is maintained but demand falls. It is unlikely that production will be maintained at current levels if there is a big drop in demand. 

 

Capital cost for petrol production will become more significant as demand and production fall, so that petrol may, in fact, become dearer.

 

New petrol powered cars would likely be dearer because they are limited production, though there will still be plenty of legacy vehicles available for a long period.

 

The need for petrol vehicles for long range supposes that there are no improvements to battery technology, charging times and infrastructure.



#3543 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,264 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 26 January 2019 - 01:06

I believe that personal car ownership rates are declining in countries like the US.

 

It is likely that children born today will never own a car, and may never have a driver's license.

Only in large metro areas.

Out state people in my state have voted people out who gave money for public transportation in metro areas and ignored those who do not live in cities.

No license, then they cannot leave the city but then divide and separate  sectors of the voting public is already a cancer in this country and transportation will become part of that cancer hopefully after I am pushing up daisies.



#3544 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,676 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 26 January 2019 - 01:09

The CD vs streaming thing has nothing to do with cars - same with the water meter thing which I don't understand what you are even implying.

Your views on cars are nothing like what I see happening around here.

 

People in the future won't buy cars, but will rent them on an as needed basis, or use autonomous car services.



#3545 RacingGreen

RacingGreen
  • Member

  • 2,376 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 26 January 2019 - 01:19

It will happen....... when insurance continues to rise and .........

 

I don't see why insurance costs will rise. Autonomous/ semi-autonomous vehicles will have additional safety features that make having an accident a much less likely occurrence than it is now so insurance costs if anything should reduce dramatically.

 

 

Having said that this topic is digressing from a discussion of the 2021 F1 regs, so in an effort to get back on topic I would like to add that I don't want any of these road relevant driver aid technologies in F1.


Edited by RacingGreen, 26 January 2019 - 01:23.


#3546 Bob Riebe

Bob Riebe
  • Member

  • 2,264 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 26 January 2019 - 01:22

People in the future won't buy cars, but will rent them on an as needed basis, or use autonomous car services.

:drunk: Oh yes, A Brave New World:drunk:



#3547 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 26 January 2019 - 02:14

I'm guessing some people are looking farther into the future than I am.  At my age, 10-20 years is the future, and a lot of these predictions aren't going to happen in that time frame.



#3548 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 17,599 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 26 January 2019 - 08:44

People in the future won't buy cars, but will rent them on an as needed basis, or use autonomous car services.

 

I'm sure a lot of people will be happy to use taxis (why we must reinvent new terms for these things I do not know) but there will still be plenty of room for those who want their own car, personalised to their tastes. Things like colour, interior trim, entertainment packages, etc. The stuff that modern car manufacturers offer as options today. It's a fundamental human trait to want stuff that is "yours", a private thing that you share with nobody, that you can customise and make your own. And of course, it's there available to you immediately when you need it.

 

I have no doubt that a proportion of especially urban population will not have that requirement for private transport in their lives, and using a taxi to get around is fine. But to think that private car ownership will become obsolete is about as silly as saying in the future people won't want to own property, we'll just rent a series of hotel rooms.



#3549 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 9,123 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 26 January 2019 - 09:32

And of course we don't know how many different prototype and evo versions are built up and make endless hours on dynos and other test benches to gather enough data to decide on the final specs, versions, etc for the components that eventually end up in the 200 engines built up that will eventually see service during the actual GP weekends.

 

 

 

You appove with this how much people who moan about the price of the current engines while hallowing the atmos fail to realize and to understand that those atmos were rediculously expensive back then as well already. And with less technology used on them...

 

If the frozen spec V8s were leased for a predetermined fixed prize that was below the costs of the actual engines ......


Edited by Henri Greuter, 26 January 2019 - 09:33.


#3550 GrumpyYoungMan

GrumpyYoungMan
  • Member

  • 5,614 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 26 January 2019 - 15:15

You appove with this how much people who moan about the price of the current engines while hallowing the atmos fail to realize and to understand that those atmos were rediculously expensive back then as well already. And with less technology used on them...

If the frozen spec V8s were leased for a predetermined fixed prize that was below the costs of the actual engines ......

It’s not even an arguement is it?

A frozen engine design is going to be cheaper than the current DEVELOPED engines.

F1 should be and has been a development series.