Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 4 votes

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


  • Please log in to reply
3659 replies to this topic

Poll: Pick and choose! (434 member(s) have cast votes)

Extra 3000rpm?

  1. Yay (391 votes [90.09%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 90.09%

  2. Nay (43 votes [9.91%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 9.91%

More prescriptive engine design, standard energy store etc

  1. Yay (224 votes [51.61%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 51.61%

  2. Nay (210 votes [48.39%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 48.39%

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

  1. Yay (323 votes [74.42%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 74.42%

  2. Nay (111 votes [25.58%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.58%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#3601 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 11 February 2019 - 18:32

There seems to be a fundamental disconnect between those who want F1 to entertain and those who want it to be a technological showcase, however irrelevant.

 

That's F1's dilemma. The teams, and possibly the FIA too, want to showcase technology. On the commercial side, though, they know that this not the stuff that is most attractive to the average Joe in the street who has some spare cash in their back pocket. So, the decision is whether you want an elite operation (I avoid the word sport), where the spectators are fewer and pay a premium, or a more mass-market operation, where they (the teams and the FIA) do what the market wants, not what they would like.



Advertisement

#3602 ClubmanGT

ClubmanGT
  • Member

  • 2,021 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 11 February 2019 - 18:59

Now that we're seeing 2019 cars and the great leap forward they were meant to bring in terms of simple aero, I'm not super hopeful for 2021. 



#3603 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • RC Forum Host

  • 3,791 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 11 February 2019 - 20:11

Now that we're seeing 2019 cars and the great leap forward they were meant to bring in terms of simple aero, I'm not super hopeful for 2021. 

 

They were never meant to be a great leap forward - I'm surprised that you're surprised? The STR basically looks exactly as I expected. 



#3604 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 502 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 12 February 2019 - 04:12

That's F1's dilemma. The teams, and possibly the FIA too, want to showcase technology. On the commercial side, though, they know that this not the stuff that is most attractive to the average Joe in the street who has some spare cash in their back pocket. So, the decision is whether you want an elite operation (I avoid the word sport), where the spectators are fewer and pay a premium, or a more mass-market operation, where they (the teams and the FIA) do what the market wants, not what they would like.

 

It is possible to provide both. My favorite way to do this is to have two classes with different rules. One class would be V12 NA engines (so we get the desired sound and keep the traditionalists happy), and the other would be a very high tech approach (I would choose gas turbine hybrids, but that is up to the teams to decide, probably having a major change every five years). Try to balance the two classes at the start of each season, but give points for best in class and overall. Each team can enter both classes if they desire to get maximum points.

 

This might sound more expensive but F1 does not work that way. Teams spend what ever money they can (and more) to win, but at the end of the day if the spectators are happy (so are the sponsers) and manufacturers can show case new technology.

 

I think it essential to have this available free to air, otherwise you will lose your fan base.



#3605 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 10:35

It's drama and unpredictability. I remember how nervous last few laps were in the 90s when rooting for a McLaren driver.

 

As a Ferrari fan in the day, you usually were finished at the halfway point in the mid ninetes when you saw Alesi grinding to a halt yet again.



#3606 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 February 2019 - 10:57

It is possible to provide both. My favorite way to do this is to have two classes with different rules. One class would be V12 NA engines (so we get the desired sound and keep the traditionalists happy), and the other would be a very high tech approach (I would choose gas turbine hybrids, but that is up to the teams to decide, probably having a major change every five years). Try to balance the two classes at the start of each season, but give points for best in class and overall. Each team can enter both classes if they desire to get maximum points.

 

This might sound more expensive but F1 does not work that way. Teams spend what ever money they can (and more) to win, but at the end of the day if the spectators are happy (so are the sponsers) and manufacturers can show case new technology.

 

I think it essential to have this available free to air, otherwise you will lose your fan base.

 

 

Two categories thus two champions as well?  Like that dreaded Jim Clark Cup instruduced in '87 for those poor teams that could't afford to remain Turbo any longer and went to the anemic Cosworths?

 

Look to a similar situation we have in long distance racing we have nowadays: Toyota in its own upper technology class vs the rest without all the hitech and see what effects it has for the interest for the championship. I wonder what would be left of the interest for long distance racing at large and how many followers it had if it wasn't for a stampede of Alonso disciples still following it since their Messias is participating in it.

 

(Alonso phrasings based on certain comments by Alonso fans during Daytona 24 that Car 10 was in maximum Godmode again....)


Edited by Henri Greuter, 12 February 2019 - 11:01.


#3607 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 February 2019 - 11:00

As a Ferrari fan in the day, you usually were finished at the halfway point in the mid ninetes when you saw Alesi grinding to a halt yet again.

 

 

oh those displays of V12 superiority .......

 

I still think a number of Ferrari haters who supported McLaren and Williams primarily were so happy that Ferrari put themselves virtually out of competition by stciking to their own traditional V12 that was both harmless for their favorites and also provided them the sounds they liked till the moments they retred while enjoying the success of their favourite teams....


Edited by Henri Greuter, 12 February 2019 - 11:01.


#3608 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,110 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 February 2019 - 11:11

I wonder what would be left of the interest for long distance racing at large and how many followers it had if it wasn't for a stampede of Alonso disciples still following it since their Messias is participating in it.

(Alonso phrasings based on certain comments by Alonso fans during Daytona 24 that Car 10 was in maximum Godmode again....)

Firstly, if Alonso is keeping endurance viewership afloat as you suggest then his presence should be very welcomed indeed.

Secondly, I think a lot of the Alonso hype was just what Motorsport lives on; that certain mythology. We often talk about performances such as Fangio at the Nurburgring in ‘57, Senna’s qualifying at Monaco, Lehto’s night stint for McLaren at Le Mans. It makes sense that we look for those kinds of performances in modern times. It’s what sustains the mythology of the sport.
It’s also hard to deny that he was quite exceptional in that car on that day in those conditions.

#3609 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 February 2019 - 11:37

Firstly, if Alonso is keeping endurance viewership afloat as you suggest then his presence should be very welcomed indeed.

Secondly, I think a lot of the Alonso hype was just what Motorsport lives on; that certain mythology. We often talk about performances such as Fangio at the Nurburgring in ‘57, Senna’s qualifying at Monaco, Lehto’s night stint for McLaren at Le Mans. It makes sense that we look for those kinds of performances in modern times. It’s what sustains the mythology of the sport.
It’s also hard to deny that he was quite exceptional in that car on that day in those conditions.

 

I won't discuss nor deny the final sentence.

 

As for your first opinion: But what when he's gone, which appears to be a very realistic option now he has won what is was all about already?

I rather see Endurance racing gaining and building a fan base not based on a single driver's particiaption only. (Same for other kinds of racing for that matter)

 

Finally, I'm not that religious but I don't think it necessary to declare a human being a God because of one single performance.

In the Christian World there is fortunately a lot of tolerance for such behaviour. but if you would be a racefan with an Islamic background, equalling whatever driver to the Upper Personality or his Prophet within that religion would earn you a death warrant in certain areas of this world because of an utter insult to Them.



#3610 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,110 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 February 2019 - 11:44

I won't discuss nor deny the final sentence.

As for your first opinion: But what when he's gone, which appears to be a very realistic option now he has won what is was all about already?
I rather see Endurance racing gaining and building a fan base not based on a single driver's particiaption only. (Same for other kinds of racing for that matter)

Finally, I'm not that religious but I don't think it necessary to declare a human being a God because of one single performance.
In the Christian World there is fortunately a lot of tolerance for such behaviour. but if you would be a racefan with an Islamic background, equalling whatever driver to the Upper Personality or his Prophet within that religion would earn you a death warrant in certain areas of this world because of an utter insult to Them.

When he’s gone, those who are genuinely hooked by endurance who wouldn’t otherwise have been watching will stay and those who were only watching for Fernando will leave. Win-win.

Respect that viewpoint on ‘god-mode’ type comments. I can certainly see why they can be viewed in bad taste. But at the same time I won’t let them detract from my (and others) enjoyment of what was a stunning human performance.

Also this has gone off topic :)

Edited by Ben1445, 12 February 2019 - 11:45.


#3611 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:23

When he’s gone, those who are genuinely hooked by endurance who wouldn’t otherwise have been watching will stay and those who were only watching for Fernando will leave. Win-win.

Respect that viewpoint on ‘god-mode’ type comments. I can certainly see why they can be viewed in bad taste. But at the same time I won’t let them detract from my (and others) enjoyment of what was a stunning human performance.

Also this has gone off topic :)

 

Did Indycar and./or Indy 500 benefit last year from Alonso being at Indy in '17 but not back in '18? (No doubt it will increase this year again ...)

 

Thanks for the understanding comment. :up:

 

Agree on the derailing of topic, fine with me to leave it at this point.



#3612 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 13:48

oh those displays of V12 superiority .......

 

I still think a number of Ferrari haters who supported McLaren and Williams primarily were so happy that Ferrari put themselves virtually out of competition by stciking to their own traditional V12 that was both harmless for their favorites and also provided them the sounds they liked till the moments they retred while enjoying the success of their favourite teams....

 

Well, their first go at the 1996 V10 didn't even make the warm-up lap in France. ;)



#3613 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:15

Well, their first go at the 1996 V10 didn't even make the warm-up lap in France.  ;)

 

... And I am pretty sure that even at this forum nowadays there are still members with such a hate for Ferrari at that time already that they still regret they got to see such only once......

 

But hey, shall we have a look on embarrassing failures of the other V10s in their very first year? Out of the top of my head I can't recall any as embarrassing of the one you mention for Renault and/or Honda but they also had their difficulties in the early part of their V10 experiences...

 

 

But you were a Ferrari fan? Think about 1999-2005. Loathing those years because it happened with V10s instead of V12s?



#3614 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 763 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:18

Did Indycar and./or Indy 500 benefit last year from Alonso being at Indy in '17 but not back in '18? (No doubt it will increase this year again ...)

 

Thanks for the understanding comment. :up:

 

Agree on the derailing of topic, fine with me to leave it at this point.

 

Yes, I think Indycar did benefit when Alonso participated.  Not that Indycar really needed any benefit but I think it did benefit in 2017 and will this year too.  Alonso has a large fan base, nothing wrong with that.  He is a very good driver but of course it is more than that.  He seems to be honest and not self promoting all the time.  He doesn't blame other people constantly and doesn't throw tantrums frequently or whine all the time.  People like those qualities, plus he gives good interviews.

 

With the success that Will Power has had on the track one would think he would have a large fan base but it is quite the opposite and I think that is because he is a whiner and consistently blames other people when anything goes wrong in the slightest.

 

It is always interesting to see what F1 does to shoot itself in the foot, looking forward to this years version.



#3615 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:40

... And I am pretty sure that even at this forum nowadays there are still members with such a hate for Ferrari at that time already that they still regret they got to see such only once......

 

But hey, shall we have a look on embarrassing failures of the other V10s in their very first year? Out of the top of my head I can't recall any as embarrassing of the one you mention for Renault and/or Honda but they also had their difficulties in the early part of their V10 experiences...

 

 

But you were a Ferrari fan? Think about 1999-2005. Loathing those years because it happened with V10s instead of V12s?

 

I was disappointed they quit the V10, hopefull when the V12 might be reintroduced early '00, but in the end I couldn't imagine we would end up with current day, *censored*-sounding 'marvels'.


Edited by SenorSjon, 12 February 2019 - 14:40.


#3616 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 763 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:51

If such a thing were possible - I would pay more to watch a single V10 race, say at Spa, than an entire season of V6T Hybrids.



#3617 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,362 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 14:54

Yes, I think Indycar did benefit when Alonso participated.  Not that Indycar really needed any benefit but I think it did benefit in 2017 and will this year too.  Alonso has a large fan base, nothing wrong with that.  He is a very good driver but of course it is more than that.  He seems to be honest and not self promoting all the time.  He doesn't blame other people constantly and doesn't throw tantrums frequently or whine all the time.  People like those qualities, plus he gives good interviews.
 
With the success that Will Power has had on the track one would think he would have a large fan base but it is quite the opposite and I think that is because he is a whiner and consistently blames other people when anything goes wrong in the slightest.
 
It is always interesting to see what F1 does to shoot itself in the foot, looking forward to this years version.


I think you’re thinking of a different Alonso, one who wouldn’t shout “GP2 engine, GP2 engine!”

#3618 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 763 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:03

I think you’re thinking of a different Alonso, one who wouldn’t shout “GP2 engine, GP2 engine!”

 

Nobody is perfect.  Most of the time he tried hard to be optimistic and talk about advances they were trying to make.  I can see where being under powered would eventually get to anybody, especially somebody who has fairly good driving talent.

 

Try to picture Hamilton in the same situation.


Edited by nonobaddog, 12 February 2019 - 15:05.


#3619 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:04

I think you’re thinking of a different Alonso, one who wouldn’t shout “GP2 engine, GP2 engine!”

 

"RTi-engine, RTi-engine!" doesn't roll off the tongue so handsomely. ;)



Advertisement

#3620 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 16,362 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:05

Nobody is perfect.  Most of the time he tried hard to be optimistic and talk about advances they were trying to make.  I can see where being under powered would eventually get to anybody, especially somebody who has fairly good driving talent.


I’d say he’s one of the most petulant whiners in motorsport, so Will Power shouldn’t have that held against him if it works so well for Fernando.

#3621 nonobaddog

nonobaddog
  • Member

  • 763 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:07

I’d say he’s one of the most petulant whiners in motorsport, so Will Power shouldn’t have that held against him if it works so well for Fernando.

 

I'd say you are probably not an Alonso fan, no?     :)



#3622 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:15

I was disappointed they quit the V10, hopefull when the V12 might be reintroduced early '00, but in the end I couldn't imagine we would end up with current day, *censored*-sounding 'marvels'.

 

I was a Ferrari fan at that time (early '90s) but I was so thankful that at long long last Ferrari finally ditched that dead end option piece of crap and joined their opponents to fight them on equal terms, hoping that it would indeed be a case of "if you can't beat them, join them".

I had read in the mid 80s already that in theory a V10 could be the best option as the perfect compromise between a V8 and a V12 and as far as I could see, Renault and (early on) Honda had approved that already. Only Ferrari continuing with that piece of prestigeous crap, making themselves look rediculous against their opponents who had seen the light long time ago already and showed so with race results and titles.............

 

I didn't expect miracles yet that first year (1996) but the first ever V10 Ferrari GP victory is still, for other reasons, one of my three most impressive ever GPs I ever saw. And the sacrifices of that first year eventually paid of handsomely. Thankfully they finally saw the light in time and see it being rewarded with in general a fantastic era for Ferrari Fans, though there certainly were flaws about it as well.

 

But I cursed those atmo's, I have always been fascinated by turbocharging and the `magic` associated with that word in the late 70s and early 80s. The '86 and '87 engines were indeed insane and a recipe for disaster in the making but the '88 generation cars still look among the best cars I can remember and with turbocharging used in a sensible manner. That could have been a base to work with in later years instead of the specs of the coffin in which F1 turbos had to be buried...



#3623 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,110 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:41

I'd say you are probably not an Alonso fan, no?     :)

Wasn't aimed at me but ... I am an Alonso fan but that doesn't bar me from saying that, at times, he is no angel. We can be fans of people and still accept their flaws. 


Edited by Ben1445, 12 February 2019 - 15:42.


#3624 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 12 February 2019 - 15:43

It is possible to provide both. My favorite way to do this is to have two classes with different rules. One class would be V12 NA engines (so we get the desired sound and keep the traditionalists happy), and the other would be a very high tech approach (I would choose gas turbine hybrids, but that is up to the teams to decide, probably having a major change every five years). Try to balance the two classes at the start of each season, but give points for best in class and overall. Each team can enter both classes if they desire to get maximum points.

 

This might sound more expensive but F1 does not work that way. Teams spend what ever money they can (and more) to win, but at the end of the day if the spectators are happy (so are the sponsers) and manufacturers can show case new technology.

 

I think it essential to have this available free to air, otherwise you will lose your fan base.

 

I see your point but, frankly, I really hate this idea of having different classes in the same race. If you like this sort of thing then maybe the FIA should consider, right now, having separate championships for Ferrari and Mercedes powered cars and for Renault and Honda ones.


Edited by pdac, 12 February 2019 - 15:43.


#3625 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 502 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 13 February 2019 - 00:03

Are we at the stage where we can 3D print an ic engine suitable for Formula 1 ? The only advantage of V8's and V10's over a V12 is that they are simpler and therefore cheaper to produce using normal production methods, but with 3D printing all should cost the same.

  V12s because of being better balanced than a V10 and with lower piston speeds due to a shorter stroke, should accelerate better, rev higher and be more reliable all else being equal. Friction would probably be higher though. They sound better to most peoples ears.

I would be interested in making it a rule that the engine is 3D printed and see where this leads to. Part can be lighter. Designs could be changed every race if allowed. It would be the ideal work for an F1 team where engine numbers are very small, and therefore small teams could make their own engines and not rely on a couple of engine manufacturers who end up with too much power (not bhp) at the expense of the racing.

 

https://www.fabbaloo...ld-this-lead-to

 

https://3dprint.com/...arathon-engine/


Edited by scolbourne, 13 February 2019 - 00:33.


#3626 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 502 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 13 February 2019 - 00:31

I see your point but, frankly, I really hate this idea of having different classes in the same race. If you like this sort of thing then maybe the FIA should consider, right now, having separate championships for Ferrari and Mercedes powered cars and for Renault and Honda ones.

 There would be two classes that need to be balanced at the start of each season but there would only be one Constructors Championship and to get the best points you would have to win in each class. Drivers could switch classes throughout the season to maximise points but this gets rather stupid and confusing. The statistics nerds would love it though.

At Le Mans it is interesting watching the different types of cars, each with their own unique sound. It is also fun to see the competition between the classes, probably each having different advantages. If a team has a fixed budget, they have to decide whether it is best to run in both classes or just one to maximise their points and prestige.



#3627 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 6,874 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 February 2019 - 00:42

 There would be two classes that need to be balanced at the start of each season but there would only be one Constructors Championship and to get the best points you would have to win in each class. Drivers could switch classes throughout the season to maximise points but this gets rather stupid and confusing. The statistics nerds would love it though.

At Le Mans it is interesting watching the different types of cars, each with their own unique sound. It is also fun to see the competition between the classes, probably each having different advantages. If a team has a fixed budget, they have to decide whether it is best to run in both classes or just one to maximise their points and prestige.

 

The issue. though, comes down again to what the mass viewer market wants out of it. I would suggest that anything that is overly complicated won't hack it. Joe Schmo just wants to see cars going round for umpteen laps, see a guy win and another come second and know, without complex maths, how those results affect their overall standings in the championships. It may provide interest for the fanatics and even the Joe Schmo's at the track. But most viewers are not at the track.



#3628 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 502 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 13 February 2019 - 02:49

To the average fan there would just be F1 cars belonging to various teams, driven by famous drivers. Most people would not care about the engine type.

The rules for the V12 would make them competitive with the current F1 cars of today. Then the new engine type would show case how economical etc. it was whilst still matching the same performance as the V12's.

We had the same with the turbos competing with na cars in the 80's. It made little difference to the average fan.


Edited by scolbourne, 13 February 2019 - 10:36.


#3629 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,615 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:11

We had the same with the turbos competing with na cars in the 90's. It made little difference to the average fan.

 

Not in the 1990s. In 1987 and 1988.

 

In 1987 it was no contest. The major teams (Ferrari, Williams, McLaren, Benetton) were all using turbos. The ones with N/A engines were Tyrell, AGS, March and Lola. All podiums were earned with turbo cars.

 

Tyrell finished in 6th place in the WCC, first of the non-turbos.

 

In 1988, with even greater restrictions on the turbos, Honda engined cars scored 28 out of the 48 podiums available, and turbos won all the races. 

 

Benetton had 7 podiums, all 3rd places. Ferrari had 8 podiums, 4 x 3rd, 3 x 2nd and 1 x 1st. McLaren had 25 podiums, all 1st or 2nd. Lotus had 3 - all 3rd. Ferraris retired about half the time.

 

Benetton was 3rd in the constructors, on 39 points to Ferrari's 65 (2nd in WCC). Next no turbo team was March, 1 point behind Lotus and Arrows with a total of 22 points.

 

 

It would be fair to say the N/A engines weren't that competitive.

 

To make the non-turbos competitive would require significant concessions.

It would be fair to say the N/A engines weren't that competitive.



#3630 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 502 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 13 February 2019 - 05:54

Not in the 1990s. In 1987 and 1988.

 

In 1987 it was no contest. The major teams (Ferrari, Williams, McLaren, Benetton) were all using turbos. The ones with N/A engines were Tyrell, AGS, March and Lola. All podiums were earned with turbo cars.

 

Tyrell finished in 6th place in the WCC, first of the non-turbos.

 

In 1988, with even greater restrictions on the turbos, Honda engined cars scored 28 out of the 48 podiums available, and turbos won all the races. 

 

Benetton had 7 podiums, all 3rd places. Ferrari had 8 podiums, 4 x 3rd, 3 x 2nd and 1 x 1st. McLaren had 25 podiums, all 1st or 2nd. Lotus had 3 - all 3rd. Ferraris retired about half the time.

 

Benetton was 3rd in the constructors, on 39 points to Ferrari's 65 (2nd in WCC). Next no turbo team was March, 1 point behind Lotus and Arrows with a total of 22 points.

 

 

It would be fair to say the N/A engines weren't that competitive.

 

To make the non-turbos competitive would require significant concessions.

It would be fair to say the N/A engines weren't that competitive.

Turbos were legal from 1966 -1985. Then na was banned in 1986. In 1987 na legal again. In 1989 turbos banned. Then from 2014 the current turbocharged V6 engines with 1600cc capacity introduced.



#3631 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 08:15

Not in the 1990s. In 1987 and 1988.
 
In 1987 it was no contest. The major teams (Ferrari, Williams, McLaren, Benetton) were all using turbos. The ones with N/A engines were Tyrell, AGS, March and Lola. All podiums were earned with turbo cars.
 
Tyrell finished in 6th place in the WCC, first of the non-turbos.
 
In 1988, with even greater restrictions on the turbos, Honda engined cars scored 28 out of the 48 podiums available, and turbos won all the races. 
 
Benetton had 7 podiums, all 3rd places. Ferrari had 8 podiums, 4 x 3rd, 3 x 2nd and 1 x 1st. McLaren had 25 podiums, all 1st or 2nd. Lotus had 3 - all 3rd. Ferraris retired about half the time.
 
Benetton was 3rd in the constructors, on 39 points to Ferrari's 65 (2nd in WCC). Next no turbo team was March, 1 point behind Lotus and Arrows with a total of 22 points.
 
 
It would be fair to say the N/A engines weren't that competitive.
 
To make the non-turbos competitive would require significant concessions.
It would be fair to say the N/A engines weren't that competitive.


Poor Jean-Marie Balestre....

As early as late '86 promising no turbos winning races anymore in 1988.....

And then to remember that in 1988 atmo cars had a maximum of only 500 kgs weight while the turbos had to be 540 and on top of that the turbos were restricted to 150 liters of fuel (some 138 kgs) while atmos were unrestricted and on average used 180 to 190 liters.
And still none of the `to be unbeatable atmos` could match the maximum power figures of the Honda on any given moment during a GP weekend.
One could almost say that all the extra fuel that the atmo's used was effectively for for nothing else but a lot more pollution as well as a lot more noise and little else that was beneficial for the performance of the car.

The only excuse the atmo brigade had that every atmo engine used in '88 was drawing back on enlarged&upgraded late 60's technology (Cosworths and slightly more modern heritage Judds) and that the new generation of atmos had yet to be introduced and didn't appear until one year later.

Comparing Honda v10 vs Honda V6 makes no sense because the turbo V6 did the job and more. But if any of the 1989 generation non-Honda atmo's had stand a chance against the Honda V6 in '88?
Ferrari was handicapped by that semi-automatic gearbox that cause a lot of retitements in '89 so there might be a slight benefit of the doubt about the v12 had it been possible to fit it with an oldstyle '88 gearbox. Something I doubt that John Barnard would have allowed to try.


Edit: Correct me if I'm wrong but I also remember something about 1989 that, despite being such a hallowed and theoretically superior in power V12, the Ferrari engine didn't have the power figures of the Honda V10 in '89 ????
EndEdit



Making the current PU's work against atmos on base of equality, I can't see how to do that anymore. The difference between the two kinds of power production is simply too large to put them up against another in a fair manner anymore I think.

Edited by Henri Greuter, 13 February 2019 - 09:57.


#3632 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 13 February 2019 - 09:05

Turbos were legal from 1966 -1985. Then na was banned in 1986. In 1987 na legal again. In 1989 turbos banned. Then from 2014 the current turbocharged V6 engines with 1600cc capacity introduced.

I don't believe N/A engines were ever banned, just not used because they were not competitive.

#3633 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 09:12

I don't believe N/A engines were ever banned, just not used because they were not competitive.



scolbourne is correct.At the start of 1986 F1 was exclusively for 1.5 liter turbocharged engines! But during the season there came that change to reverse the direction in the opposite manner and ban turbocharging from 1989 on. And then we had the formulas as described already with '87 destined to be the last season in which turbo's would have an upperhand but intended to be field filling in '88 like the atmo's had been the year before.
But that went a little different as we know by now.....

#3634 Wuzak

Wuzak
  • Member

  • 6,615 posts
  • Joined: September 00

Posted 13 February 2019 - 10:21

I want to defend the V12 a little bit here.

 

Ferrari won 4 of 5 WCC from 1975 to 1979 and 3 WDCs using the flat 12 when its competitors were developing ground effects, something that the flat 12 hindered, to a degree.

 

In 1989, the return of the V12, Ferrari was unreliable. Berger finished 3 races - 1 x 1st and 2 x 2nd. Mansell finished 6 times - 2 x 1st, 2 x 2nd and 2 x 3rd.

 

In 1990 Prost won 5 times and finished on the podium 4 more time (2 each 2nd and 3rd). Mansell finished 7 times, (1 x 1st, 3 x 2nd, 1 x 3rd and 2 x 4th).

 

But for 1991 the chassis was not great. Prost still managed 5 podiums from 8 finishes, while Alesi collected 3 podiums from 6 finishes.

 

The '92 car was worse, 1993 was similar,. The 1994 car was still unreliable, but better, 1995 was similar.

 

Not all of the performance problems came from having a V12 engine. 

 

And in 1991 Honda dominated with a V12.



#3635 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 13 February 2019 - 10:44

scolbourne is correct.At the start of 1986 F1 was exclusively for 1.5 liter turbocharged engines! But during the season there came that change to reverse the direction in the opposite manner and ban turbocharging from 1989 on. And then we had the formulas as described already with '87 destined to be the last season in which turbo's would have an upperhand but intended to be field filling in '88 like the atmo's had been the year before.
But that went a little different as we know by now.....

Fair enough, I stand corrected.

#3636 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 13 February 2019 - 11:20

I want to defend the V12 a little bit here.

 

Ferrari won 4 of 5 WCC from 1975 to 1979 and 3 WDCs using the flat 12 when its competitors were developing ground effects, something that the flat 12 hindered, to a degree.

 

In 1989, the return of the V12, Ferrari was unreliable. Berger finished 3 races - 1 x 1st and 2 x 2nd. Mansell finished 6 times - 2 x 1st, 2 x 2nd and 2 x 3rd.

 

In 1990 Prost won 5 times and finished on the podium 4 more time (2 each 2nd and 3rd). Mansell finished 7 times, (1 x 1st, 3 x 2nd, 1 x 3rd and 2 x 4th).

 

But for 1991 the chassis was not great. Prost still managed 5 podiums from 8 finishes, while Alesi collected 3 podiums from 6 finishes.

 

The '92 car was worse, 1993 was similar,. The 1994 car was still unreliable, but better, 1995 was similar.

 

Not all of the performance problems came from having a V12 engine. 

 

And in 1991 Honda dominated with a V12.

 

I've read an old titbit yesterday that in post season testing in 1995, Schumacher was 2 seconds faster than either Berger or Alesi in the same car. Alesi also wasn't the most reliable driver and I think combined with the fragile Ferrari, that caused a lot of unforced DNF's. With a bit of different aligned stars, a V12 could have won in 1995 and/or 1996 if they pushed through with it, the performance was in the car.


Edited by SenorSjon, 13 February 2019 - 11:21.


#3637 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 11:33

I want to defend the V12 a little bit here.
 
Ferrari won 4 of 5 WCC from 1975 to 1979 and 3 WDCs using the flat 12 when its competitors were developing ground effects, something that the flat 12 hindered, to a degree.
 
In 1989, the return of the V12, Ferrari was unreliable. Berger finished 3 races - 1 x 1st and 2 x 2nd. Mansell finished 6 times - 2 x 1st, 2 x 2nd and 2 x 3rd.
 
In 1990 Prost won 5 times and finished on the podium 4 more time (2 each 2nd and 3rd). Mansell finished 7 times, (1 x 1st, 3 x 2nd, 1 x 3rd and 2 x 4th).
 
But for 1991 the chassis was not great. Prost still managed 5 podiums from 8 finishes, while Alesi collected 3 podiums from 6 finishes.
 
The '92 car was worse, 1993 was similar,. The 1994 car was still unreliable, but better, 1995 was similar.
 
Not all of the performance problems came from having a V12 engine. 
 
And in 1991 Honda dominated with a V12.



As for the Flat-12 titles of Ferrari, I am not entirely convinced that this was largely related to the power advantage offerering just enough of an advantage to compensate for the larger fuel consumption.
I think that another factor in the success of the Flat-12 was its lay-out that offered a lower GC and that apart from the power advantage (which was partly eroded by the larger weight of the car due to the need to consume more fuel)
As long as the monocoques and bodywork of the cars were not used for downforce generating purposes (pre-ground effect) the engine still had this advantange to lower the GC of the entire car and thus improve the handling.
Somehow I have the feeling that this advantage of the Flat-12 is not rated enough.


I do recall Ferrari being horribly unreliable in '89 but I can't look it up right now but I felt that this had largely to do with the semi-automatic gearbox being unreliable and letting the car down most of the time????

As for the domination of Honda in '91, given the fact that in later years the V10 concept still gained the upper hand, I still wonder what Mclaren-Honda had achieved if Honda had remained committed to the V10. Don't forget that in '91 Honda dominated only the first part of the season while Williams-Honda was unreliable then but later on Mansell had a great come-back but just too late to snatch the title away from Senna. And that was with a car that had no active yet if I recall correct.

#3638 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 11:36

I've read an old titbit yesterday that in post season testing in 1995, Schumacher was 2 seconds faster than either Berger or Alesi in the same car. Alesi also wasn't the most reliable driver and I think combined with the fragile Ferrari, that caused a lot of unforced DNF's. With a bit of different aligned stars, a V12 could have won in 1995 and/or 1996 if they pushed through with it, the performance was in the car.



Was that one lap speed?
A race with 50 and more laps and still be 2 seconds faster per lap would have required quite a bit more fuel and make things in race conditions an entirely different matter.

Edited by Henri Greuter, 13 February 2019 - 11:45.


#3639 CSF

CSF
  • Member

  • 513 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 13 February 2019 - 11:49

I do recall Ferrari being horribly unreliable in '89 but I can't look it up right now but I felt that this had largely to do with the semi-automatic gearbox being unreliable and letting the car down most of the time???

 

John Barnard in Motorsport magazine suggested it was the v12 causing all the issues: 

 

"The 640’s technical woes before and after its epic debut were widely reported as being “gearbox”, but Barnard wants the record set straight. Investigations at Maranello would reveal the four-bearing 3.5-litre V12 was subject to a high-frequency crankshaft vibration that caused the alternator drivebelt to fly off. Result? No electrics. Inconvenient for a car with an electro-hydraulic gearshift."



Advertisement

#3640 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 12:29

John Barnard in Motorsport magazine suggested it was the v12 causing all the issues: 
 
"The 640’s technical woes before and after its epic debut were widely reported as being “gearbox”, but Barnard wants the record set straight. Investigations at Maranello would reveal the four-bearing 3.5-litre V12 was subject to a high-frequency crankshaft vibration that caused the alternator drivebelt to fly off. Result? No electrics. Inconvenient for a car with an electro-hydraulic gearshift."[/size]



Thanks, I stand corrected.

#3641 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 13 February 2019 - 12:36

John Barnard in Motorsport magazine suggested it was the v12 causing all the issues: 

 

"The 640’s technical woes before and after its epic debut were widely reported as being “gearbox”, but Barnard wants the record set straight. Investigations at Maranello would reveal the four-bearing 3.5-litre V12 was subject to a high-frequency crankshaft vibration that caused the alternator drivebelt to fly off. Result? No electrics. Inconvenient for a car with an electro-hydraulic gearshift."

 

Or design a better alternator. It is a bit cheap to put it onto the engine. Perhaps it had something to do with Barnar working in England and the rest of the team in Italy. ;)



#3642 midgrid

midgrid
  • Member

  • 7,241 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 13 February 2019 - 12:47

I've read an old titbit yesterday that in post season testing in 1995, Schumacher was 2 seconds faster than either Berger or Alesi in the same car. Alesi also wasn't the most reliable driver and I think combined with the fragile Ferrari, that caused a lot of unforced DNF's. With a bit of different aligned stars, a V12 could have won in 1995 and/or 1996 if they pushed through with it, the performance was in the car.


As an aside, Alesi did actually complete the greatest distance of the field in both the 1997 and 2001 seasons.

#3643 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 12:53

Or design a better alternator. It is a bit cheap to put it onto the engine. Perhaps it had something to do with Barnar working in England and the rest of the team in Italy.  ;)



Same kind of thing as the fuel supply on the 1982 Renault engine. One critical component within an auxillary part on the engine that eventually let the entire engine and car down to often and nearly structurally.


I am told that reading Barnard's biography is kinda revealing about how his times with Ferrari really were compared with what is generally believed to be the case.
I'm reading the book right now but have yet to start his F1 exploits so I can't say more about it but I've understood that the book is revealing in that subject....

#3644 PlayboyRacer

PlayboyRacer
  • Member

  • 1,521 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 13 February 2019 - 13:12

And in 1991 Honda dominated with a V12.

No it actually didn't. In fact Senna spent alot of time complaining that the Honda V12 was lacking the horsepower needed and putting pressure on them publicly. He saw the writing on the wall.

They hung on for both world titles in '91, thanks to Sennas flying start and the Williams Renault being fragile. But they were gradually being left behind and the Renault V10 was the new benchmark.

Why Honda went the V12 route has always stumped me. Perhaps it became all too easy for them, having dominated with the turbo V6 and V10. It seemed more about vanity than anything else and they got exposed.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 13 February 2019 - 13:15.


#3645 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 8,913 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 13 February 2019 - 13:18

They went for outright power, disregarding weight and other issues. In the end, that was not the fastest way to go. 

 

But yet, we linger in the past again. I bet we won't see hyperdrives in 2021.  :rotfl:



#3646 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 8,748 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 13 February 2019 - 13:41

They went for outright power, disregarding weight and other issues. In the end, that was not the fastest way to go.


Pretty much what Ferrari had done and kept on doing even longer that Honda ......

#3647 tokengator82

tokengator82
  • Member

  • 692 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 18 February 2019 - 23:22

https://twitter.com/...562045422161920


The FIA have issued an invitation to tender for the sole supply of gearboxes from 2021 onwards. Objective is 'to select an exclusive supplier to produce, deliver and maintain' gearboxes for at least four seasons. #F1 #F1Testing

Edited by tokengator82, 18 February 2019 - 23:23.


#3648 tokengator82

tokengator82
  • Member

  • 692 posts
  • Joined: August 16

Posted 18 February 2019 - 23:25

In addition to the above:


From speaking to a tech journo who is far more knowledgeable than me on mechanical things, this is likely to only refer to the internals of the gearbox and that the casing would still be open to design as part of structure/aero. Will seek proper clarification though

#3649 OO7

OO7
  • Member

  • 18,229 posts
  • Joined: November 04

Posted 18 February 2019 - 23:57

https://twitter.com/...562045422161920


The FIA have issued an invitation to tender for the sole supply of gearboxes from 2021 onwards. Objective is 'to select an exclusive supplier to produce, deliver and maintain' gearboxes for at least four seasons. #F1 #F1Testing

Ridiculous!



#3650 Ben1445

Ben1445
  • Member

  • 2,110 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 19 February 2019 - 00:02

Ridiculous!

It's not so ridiculous when we remember F1 has a budgets problem and it needs solutions. Compromises will have to be made somewhere. Tendered component supply would be a proven cost saving model that has worked in other series and even in F1 itself (the ECU to name but one).