the new 2006 rules are a big lost to f1,being that no more than 8 cylinders will be allowed, there goes the sound, that f1 is noted for, good sounding multicylinder engines, these v8's will probably be the sorry, four cylinder sounding kind, with the 180 degree crankshaft, firing two pistons at the same time, at 180 degrees of crank rotation. That will SUCK; like going to a punky, boy racer rally, spoilers and fart can exhaust pipes. Lets hope there will some good ole 90 degree crank v8's, at least at 20,000rpm they will sound like a v16 brm, if fitted with a good crossover exhaust systems or X-pipe, or maybe a inline 7cylinder with 51.4 degree crank throws. belive me the man in the Grandstand will know the difference, we all missed the wail of the v12's after they were banned. i think the reduction in the engine size is ok, but limiting the cylinder count is a mistake, that we will notice. being stationed about 12 miles from HockinhiemRing in germany. i am close enough to go to the races, f1 and dtm and the dtm cars are high reving 180degree crank v8 engines and belive me, they sound no different than the 4 cylinder STW cars 4 years ago, like a fast and furous parking lot gathering.
Last edited by patrick clement on 20 Feb 2005, 01:49, edited 4 times in total.
why would they have a 180 degree engine if they are now in the regions of 72-90? i think its cool, v8s usually make more torque and wont rev quite as high so theyre may even be some lower soundsits gonna be cool.
sharkie17 wrote:no ---. V8s wont sound like farts, V8s will actually sound pretty damn good.
not all v8's are the same, you have the ones that fire two pistons together, every half turn of it's 180 degree crankshaft and the ones that fire a piston every 1/4 turn of the crank. the ones used for racing is usally the 180 degree type. go to this web site and scrowl down to the v8, it is the 180 degree crank type. http://www.wis.co.uk/justin/deltic-engine.html
Toyotas engine guy Luca marmorini told me the V8 will sound "very nice", that is coming from an itialian who used to work in Ferraris F1 program.
They wil not rev to 20K teams expect the RPM limit to still be around 19K RPM due to vibrations
sharkie17 wrote:no ---. V8s wont sound like farts, V8s will actually sound pretty damn good.
not all v8's are the same, you have the ones that fire two pistons together, every half turn of it's 180 degree crankshaft and the ones that fire a piston every 1/4 turn of the crank. the ones used for racing is usally the 180 degree type. go to this web site and scrowl down to the v8, it is the 180 degree crank type. http://www.wis.co.uk/justin/deltic-engine.html
patrick clement wrote:
these v8's will probably be the sorry, four cylinder sounding kind, with the 180 degree crankshaft, firing two pistons at the same time, at 180 degrees of crank rotation. That will SUCK; like going to a punky, boy racer rally, spoilers and fart can exhaust pipes
The pistons aren’t firing at the same time, with a 180° crank you have two pistons at the TDC contemporarily but one of them is at the end of the compression stroke, hence there’s the ignition, while the other is at the end of the exhaust stroke, no ignition there, hence the ignitions are evenly spaced every 90°.
The difference in the sound between the 180° crank and the 90° crank is primarily given by the fact that with a 180° crank you have always ignitions from cylinders of the two banks, hence from the two exhausts, alternatively (left – right – left – right...) while with a 90° crank you have on occasion two consecutive ignitions from two cylinders of the same bank hence from the same exhaust (left-right-right-left-right-left-left...).
Then which sound you like the most is subjective, actually most of people I know do prefer the sound of the 180° crank, you apparently prefer the 90°, it’s subjective and surely isn’t the factor leading to the choice of a design.
patrick clement wrote:
the dtm cars are high reving 180degree crank v8 engines and belive me, they sound no different than the 4 cylinder STW cars 4 years ago
DTM V8 have intake restrictors and peak rpm is in the order of 7500-8000k rpm, I hardly would call these engines high revving.
scarbs wrote:Toyotas engine guy Luca marmorini told me the V8 will sound "very nice", that is coming from an itialian who used to work in Ferraris F1 program.
They wil not rev to 20K teams expect the RPM limit to still be around 19K RPM due to vibrations
to my ear and many of my motor head buddies, the 180 degree crank v8 sounds like two 4 cylinder engines running side by side. i hope they will use the 90 degree type crank in the f1 v8's to remedy this fault.
patrick clement wrote:
these v8's will probably be the sorry, four cylinder sounding kind, with the 180 degree crankshaft, firing two pistons at the same time, at 180 degrees of crank rotation. That will SUCK; like going to a punky, boy racer rally, spoilers and fart can exhaust pipes
The pistons aren’t firing at the same time, with a 180° crank you have two pistons at the TDC contemporarily but one of them is at the end of the compression stroke, hence there’s the ignition, while the other is at the end of the exhaust stroke, no ignition there, hence the ignitions are evenly spaced every 90°.
The difference in the sound between the 180° crank and the 90° crank is primarily given by the fact that with a 180° crank you have always ignitions from cylinders of the two banks, hence from the two exhausts, alternatively (left – right – left – right...) while with a 90° crank you have on occasion two consecutive ignitions from two cylinders of the same bank hence from the same exhaust (left-right-right-left-right-left-left...).
Then which sound you like the most is subjective, actually most of people I know do prefer the sound of the 180° crank, you apparently prefer the 90°, it’s subjective and surely isn’t the factor leading to the choice of a design.
the dtm cars are high reving 180degree crank v8 engines and belive me, they sound no different than the 4 cylinder STW cars 4 years ago
DTM V8 have intake restrictors and peak rpm is in the order of 7500-8000k rpm, I hardly would call these engines high revving.[/quote]
"22.2 Amendments to Article 5 :
5.1 Engine specification :
5.1.1 Only 4-stroke engines with reciprocating pistons are
permitted.
5.1.2 Subject only to Article 5.2, engine capacity must not
exceed 2400cc.
5.1.3 Supercharging is forbidden.
5.1.4 All engines must have 8 cylinders arranged
in a 90° "V" configuration and the normal section of each
cylinder must be circular.
5.1.5 Engines may must have no more than 5 valves two inlet
and two exhaust valves per cylinder all of which must be
circular.
Only reciprocating poppet valves are permitted.
The sealing interface between the moving valve
component and the stationary engine component must
be circular.
5.2 Alternative engines :
For 2006 and 2007 only, the FIA reserves the right to
allow any team to use an engine complying with the
2005 engine regulations, provided its maximum
crankshaft rotational speed does not exceed a limit
fixed from time to time by the FIA so as to ensure that
such an engine will only be used by a team which does
not have access to a competitive 2.4 litre V8 engine.
5.3 Other means of propulsion :
5.3.1 Subject only to Article 5.2, the use of any device, other
than the 2.4 litre, four stroke engine described in 5.1
above, to power the car, is not permitted.
5.3.2 The total amount of recoverable energy stored on the car
must not exceed 300kJ, any which may be recovered at a
rate greater than 2kW must not exceed 20kJ.
5.4 Exhaust system :
Variable geometric length geometry exhaust systems are
forbidden.
5.4 Engine dimensions :
5.4.1 Cylinder bore diameter may not exceed 98mm.
5.4.2 Cylinder spacing must be fixed at 106.5mm (+/- 0.2mm).
5.4.3 The crankshaft centreline must not be less than 58mm
above the reference plane.
5.5 Engine materials :
5.5.1 The basic structure of the crankshaft and camshafts must
be made from steel or cast iron.
5.5.2 Pistons, cylinder heads and cylinder blocks may not be
composite structures which use carbon or aramid fibre
reinforcing materials.
5.5 Weight and centre of gravity :
5.5.1 The overall weight of the engine must be a minimum of
95kg.
5.5.2 The centre of gravity of the engine may not lie less than
165mm above the reference plane.
5.5.3 The longitudinal and lateral position of the centre of
gravity of the engine must fall within a region that is the
geometric centre of the engine, +/- 50mm.
5.5.4 When establishing conformity with Article 5.5, the
engine will include the intake system up to and
including the air filter, fuel rail and injectors, ignition
coils, engine mounted sensors and wiring, alternator,
coolant pumps and oil pumps.
5.5.5 When establishing conformity with Article 5.5, the
engine will not include liquids, exhaust manifolds, heat
shields, oil tanks, water system accumulators, heat
exchangers, hydraulic system (e.g. pumps,
accumulators, manifolds, servo-valves, solenoids,
actuators) except servo-valve and actuator for engine
throttle control, fuel pumps nor any component not
mounted on the engine when fitted to the car.
5.6 Variable geometry systems :
5.6.1 Variable geometry inlet systems are not permitted.
5.6.2 Variable geometry exhaust systems are not permitted.
5.6.3 Variable valve timing and variable valve lift systems are
not permitted.
5.7.2 Only one fuel injector per cylinder is permitted which
must inject directly into the side or the top of the inlet
port.
5.8 Electrical systems :
5.8.1 Ignition is only permitted by means of a single ignition
coil and single spark plug per cylinder. The use of
plasma, laser or other high frequency ignition
techniques is forbidden.
5.8.2 Only conventional spark plugs that function by high
tension electrical discharge across an exposed gap are
permitted.
Spark plugs are not subject to the materials restrictions
described in Articles 5.13 and 5.14.
5.8.3 The primary regulated voltage on the car must not
exceed 17.0V DC. This voltage is defined as the
stabilised output from the on-car charging system.
5.9 Engine actuators :
With the following exceptions hydraulic, pneumatic or
electronic actuation is forbidden :
a) Electronic solenoids uniquely for the control of engine
fluids ;
b) Components providing controlled pressure air for a
pneumatic valve system ;
c) A single actuator to operate the throttle system of the
engine.
5.10 Engine auxiliaries :
With the exception of electrical fuel pumps engine auxiliaries
must be mechanically driven directly from the engine with a
fixed speed ratio to the crankshaft.
5.11 Engine intake air :
5.11.1 Other than injection of fuel for the normal purpose of
combustion in the engine, any device, system, procedure,
construction or design the purpose or effect of which is any
decrease in the temperature of the engine intake air is
forbidden.
5.11.2 Other than engine sump breather gases and fuel for the
normal purpose of combustion in the engine, the spraying of
any substance into the engine intake air is forbidden.
5.12 Materials and Construction - Definitions :
5.12.1 X Based Alloy (e.g. Ni based alloy) – X must be the
most abundant element in the alloy on a %w/w basis.
The minimum possible weight percent of the element X
must always be greater than the maximum possible of
each of the other individual elements present in the
alloy.
5.12.2 X-Y Based Alloy (e.g. Al-Cu based alloy) – X must be
the most abundant element as in 5.12.1 above. In
addition element Y must be the second highest
constituent (%w/w), after X in the alloy. The mean
content of Y and all other alloying elements must be
used to determine the second highest alloying element
(Y).
5.12.3 Intermetallic Materials (e.g. TiAl, NiAl, FeAl, Cu3Au,
NiCo) – These are materials where the material is based
upon intermetallic phases, i.e. the matrix of the material
consists of greater then 50%v/v intermetallic phase(s).
An intermetallic phase is a solid solution between two
or more metals exhibiting either partly ionic or
covalent, or metallic bonding with a long range order,
in a narrow range of composition around the
stoichiometric proportion.
5.12.4 Composite Materials – These are materials where a
matrix material is reinforced by either a continuous or
discontinuous phase. The matrix can be metallic,
ceramic, polymeric or glass based. The reinforcement
can be present as long fibres (continuous
reinforcement); or short fibres, whiskers and particles
(discontinuous reinforcement).
5.12.5 Metal Matrix Composites (MMC’s) – These are materials
with a metallic matrix containing a phase of greater
than 2%v/v which is not soluble in the liquid phase of
the metallic matrix.
5.12.6 Ceramic Materials (e.g. Al2O3, SiC, B4C, Ti5Si3, SiO2,
Si3N4) – These are inorganic, non metallic solids.
5.13 Materials and construction – General :
5.13.1 Unless explicitly permitted for a specific engine
component, the following materials may not be used
anywhere on the engine :
a) Magnesium based alloys
b) Metal Matrix Composites (MMC’s)
c) Intermetallic materials
d) Alloys containing more than 5% by weight of
Beryllium, Iridium or Rhenium.
5.13.2 Coatings are free provided the total coating thickness
does not exceed 25% of the section thickness of the
underlying base material in all axes. In all cases the
relevant coating must not exceed 0.8mm.
5.14 Materials and construction – Components :
5.14.1 Pistons must be manufactured from an aluminium alloy
which is either Al-Si ; Al-Cu ; Al-Mg or Al-Zn based.
5.14.2 Piston pins must be manufactured from an iron based
alloy and must be machined from a single piece of
material.
5.14.3 Connecting rods must be manufactured from iron or
titanium based alloys and must be machined from a
single piece of material with no welded or joined
assemblies (other than a bolted big end cap or an
interfered small end bush).
5.14.4 Crankshafts must be manufactured from an iron based
alloy.
No welding is permitted between the front and rear
main bearing journals.
No material with a density exceeding 19,000kg/m3 may
be assembled to the crankshaft.
5.14.5 Camshafts must be manufactured from an iron based
alloy.
Each camshaft and lobes must be machined from a
single piece of material.
No welding is allowed between the front and rear
bearing journals.
5.14.6 Valves must be manufactured from alloys based on
Iron, Nickel, Cobalt or Titanium.
Hollow structures cooled by sodium, lithium or similar
are permitted.
5.14.7 Reciprocating and rotating components :
a) Reciprocating and rotating components must
not be manufactured from graphitic matrix,
metal matrix composites or ceramic materials.
This restriction does not apply to the clutch and
any seals ;
b) Rolling elements of rolling element bearings
must be manufactured from an iron based alloy;
c) Timing gears between the crankshaft and
camshafts (including hubs) must be
manufactured from an iron based alloy.
5.14.8 Static components :
a) Engine crankcases and cylinder heads must be
manufactured from cast or wrought aluminium
alloys.
No composite materials or metal matrix
composites are permitted either for the whole
component or locally.
b) Any metallic structure whose primary or
secondary function is to retain lubricant or
coolant within the engine must be
manufactured from an iron based alloy or an
aluminium alloy of the Al-Si, Al-Cu, Al-Zn or Al-
Mg alloying systems.
c) All threaded fasteners must be manufactured
from an alloy based on Cobalt, Iron or Nickel.
Composite materials are not permitted.
d) Valve seat inserts, valve guides and any other
bearing component may be manufactured from
metallic infiltrated pre-forms with other phases
which are not used for reinforcement."
It brings back fond memories of Keith Duckworth and the DVF.
If the governing body of F1 wishes to restrict the 2006 engines to this extent, they should go the whole hog and insist upon a common engine from a third party supplier. I imagine the teams are still going to be spending vast amounts of money on r&d in an attempt to scrimp small improvements in horsepower and tractability from the new stringently regulated 2006 engines. According to a popular F1 magazine Toyota's engine budget for 2005 was $192,50m with r&d (on the whole car) at $25.10m. I don't think that the new regulations will drastically reduce these numbers. While i don't believe that a common engine would benefit the sport it would surely reduce these costs.
despite Mosley's rants about how great and successfull the new rules are, I see slight irregularities. For instance, the Renault engine designer let out this little tidbit "The direct engine costs of running the car will be lower in 2005: the number of engines built will be substantially less and although each one is more expensive, there is a net saving. Change obviously has cost implications in terms of development, and these costs will offset the savings for the manufacturers. However, it is reasonable to expect that small teams buying engines will see real economies thanks to the regulations." http://www.renaultf1.com/en/car/engine/ ... cm:3-32523
If you read between the lines... it appears engines are just as costly as before. They don't have to produce as many, but each one is now more expensive. R&D costs have gone up, and it appears the only ones who may benefit are third parties, like Jordan, or Sauber.
V-8's aren't all that bad, back in the post WW2 era, the V-8 found a nice home in F1, especially the Cosworth V-8.
I personally don't believe that V8's are going to be detrimental to the sport. Apart from the obvious reduction in power output these engines will still be high revving, high output, V configurated engines and they will still scream!
