Sustainable fuels for 2026. V10's will be green!

[taperoo2k]

It's reached 52% now ...Dropping the MGU-H and unrestricting the MGU-K should see more gains made for the 2026 PU's.

the thermal efficiency of the PU cannot be increased by enlarging the MGU-K
because recovery of actual kinetic energy isn't part of the 52%

the K machine only contributes to (WOT) PU performance when motoring the crankshaft on electricity from G-H action

I was speaking about the overall performance of the PU. Gains will be made from unrestricting the MGU-K (and offset the loss of the MGU-H) but not in the thermal efficiency area of the PU. If any improvements happen there it will come from manufacturers improving the ICE and associated components over time.

[PlatinumZealot]

Define this phrase ("Stereo-specific interactions") and then I'll tell you further more, my teacher ...

Ha. It is what I read. I'm nit expert but what I gathered is that the left or right handedness will not affect (other than opitcal) properties on their if it is one substance alone, but when combined with alcohols and other polar substances there can be interesting interactions.

I am just putting it out there that this could be away to get different priperties from the same compounds declared to the FIA..

[PlatinumZealot]

It's reached 52% now ...Dropping the MGU-H and unrestricting the MGU-K should see more gains made for the 2026 PU's.

the thermal efficiency of the PU cannot be increased by enlarging the MGU-K
because recovery of actual kinetic energy isn't part of the 52%

the K machine only contributes to (WOT) PU performance when motoring the crankshaft on electricity from G-H action

I was speaking about the overall performance of the PU. Gains will be made from unrestricting the MGU-K (and offset the loss of the MGU-H) but not in the thermal efficiency area of the PU. If any improvements happen there it will come from manufacturers improving the ICE and associated components over time.

You commented specifically to the thermal efficiency so we got the impression that you believed unrestricting the MGUK would improve it.

You could have a point if there is evidence that the MGUH in the most efficient PU mode has an excess of energy to send to the batterywhich otherwise would go to MGUK... But this is obviously an paradox because the engineers would already design the MGUH and size the turbocharger so that there is no excess in the most efficient mode.

[taperoo2k]

the thermal efficiency of the PU cannot be increased by enlarging the MGU-K
because recovery of actual kinetic energy isn't part of the 52%

the K machine only contributes to (WOT) PU performance when motoring the crankshaft on electricity from G-H action

I was speaking about the overall performance of the PU. Gains will be made from unrestricting the MGU-K (and offset the loss of the MGU-H) but not in the thermal efficiency area of the PU. If any improvements happen there it will come from manufacturers improving the ICE and associated components over time.

You commented specifically to the thermal efficiency so we got the impression that you believed unrestricting the MGUK would improve it.

You could have a point if there is evidence that the MGUH in the most efficient PU mode has an excess of energy to send to the batterywhich otherwise would go to MGUK... But this is obviously an paradox because the engineers would already design the MGUH and size the turbocharger so that there is no excess in the most efficient mode.

I was speaking about the overall power output of the PU, if the Thermal efficiency of the ICE improves then it will be down to the redesign of the ICE to accommodate the synthetic fuels and lubricants, alongside other parts of the ICE.
The aim with the the 2026 PU's is to use the MGU-K in combination with harvesting more brake energy, to try and reach 350kw, which is about 230kw more than the MGU-K and MGU-H produce in the current power Units.

[AngusF1]

Because V10 engines sound awesome. That's the only selling point for it...

There are several advantages to the high-revving NA engine.

• Sound (as you say).

• Weight: The V10 engines produced nearly 1000hp from a mandated 95kg weight. Rumour has it that they could actually have been built down to 65kg. Compared to the obese turbo engines this is really impressive.

• Size and packaging shape: The engines are tiny and nearly cubic in shape. From a packaging perspective this is ideal.

• Lack of ancillary systems: no requirement for compressor, turbine, MGU-H, MGU-K, intercoolers, battery pack and power electronics, not to mention the complex power management software required to tie them all together.

• Driveability and transient response: NA engines can be made highly driveable without additional components. Turbo engines by comparison naturally have terrible transient response requiring all the above computer-controlled components to ameliorate. Consequently the NA engines can be argued to provide greater control over the power delivery to the driver, which produces greater differentiation based on driver talent.

• Minimum cost: It's much cheaper to design and build just an engine compared to an engine plus all the above-mentioned ancillaries.

• Accessibility: Competitive high output NA engines can be produced by a wide variety of manufacturers, including independent outfits (eg Cosworth, Judd, all the sportsbike manufacturers...); and the technology to do so is relatively straightforward and widely available. In comparison producing a competitive "power unit" costs billions so is only accessible to the major manufacturers.

• Road relevance (yes, really). The vast majority of seriously high performance sporting vehicles purchased and on the road today are actually sports motorcycles. Every one of these utilises a high-output, high revving NA engine. Vehicles employing the full gamut of hybrid technologies currently used in F1 are tiny in number and are affordable only by super-millionaires. Think, how common is it to see a sports bike on the road compared to a top-end Ferrari, Mclaren or Mercedes hypercar? Even in California there's no comparison.

[vorticism]

The motorcycles example above is a good one which illustrates solving for cost vs performance vs weight vs compactness. I'd add that imo one auto maker had an advantage heading into the complexity of 2014--the powerhouse of Mercedes, as they should have give their long history with relevant technologies. I think the NA format is more approachable for both engine makers generally and for non-works teams as customers. Suddenly the engines doubled or tripled in complexity and the rest is history.

[Big Tea]

There is a greater possibility of a privateer or manufacturer not currently involved producing an 'engine only' to supply with a bare ICE and not all the associated gizmos required too.
As mentioned above, possibly one of the motorcycle or marine/snowmobile/drone builders.

[atanatizante]

Define this phrase ("Stereo-specific interactions") and then I'll tell you further more, my teacher ...

Ha. It is what I read. I'm nit expert but what I gathered is that the left or right handedness will not affect (other than opitcal) properties on their if it is one substance alone, but when combined with alcohols and other polar substances there can be interesting interactions.

I am just putting it out there that this could be away to get different priperties from the same compounds declared to the FIA..

Ok, I got what you mean... you are right: there are chemical interactions but only happening under special phisical conditions (pressure and temperature) and with the help of certain catalysts ... but there are scarce info coz this chemistry field is new and requires lots of experiments thus resources that I think petrochemical companies are not willing to invest had there are no real life & significant benefits ... and in addition to that I think there are also very small gains for F1 cars in race conditions ...

Regarding this matter I'd like to ask you had Honda's superiority is due to being able to develop/convert more electric power from ICE's fuel to MGU-H, which is free according to the rules, and use this free electric power in order to compensate what both MGU-K & MGU-H can't harvest over a lap...

I mean it's a known fact that both MGU-K & MGU-H couldn't harvest & deploy (on any race track) those 4MJ for the entire lap and this could be achieved only by converting fuel to electricity thorough MGU-H but this thing requires both some lift and coast during the race and mostly a very efficient or very good yield for this process and my understanding is that in this latter job/action Honda is above/superior to any other F1 PU manufacturer...

[PlatinumZealot]

I don't think Honda is more powerful at peak power. We saw this last year in Brazil. Honda has more racing power this year because of lower friction components. To be reliable they did not turn down their engine as much as Mercedes had to.