High revving straight fives instead of v6’s

[haza]

As F1 goes smaller and smaller with combustion I thought I’d imagine a straight five in the back of an F1 car rather than the proposed 50/50 v6 for 2026 as it’d be smaller and lighter then I came across this video on YouTube



The sound would be amazing at 13-15k rpm and you could still run it on hybrid power

[djones]

I don't even know why they bother with all the cost and complexity of hybrid (or even turbo) in a sport.

It's a sport. Just save a load of cash, make it more fun to watch and have 3.0 N/A V8s with no rev limits but an engine allowance per year still.

Or if you want a laugh, give them X litres of fuel to use per race and they can use whatever engine they want. All of a sudden developing for power and efficiency without it being in a very narrow scope would bring proper innovation that might actually be transferable to road cars etc.

[MadMax]

I don't even know why they bother with all the cost and complexity of hybrid (or even turbo) in a sport.

It's a sport. Just save a load of cash, make it more fun to watch and have 3.0 N/A V8s with no rev limits but an engine allowance per year still.

Or if you want a laugh, give them X litres of fuel to use per race and they can use whatever engine they want. All of a sudden developing for power and efficiency without it being in a very narrow scope would bring proper innovation that might actually be transferable to road cars etc.

In an open formula, the rich teams will be even further ahead than they are now.

F1 is not road relevant. Never has been, never will be, unless they change the rules to include multiple seats, fenders, emissions controls, WLTP requirements, etc.

[Hoffman900]

I don't even know why they bother with all the cost and complexity of hybrid (or even turbo) in a sport.

It's a sport. Just save a load of cash, make it more fun to watch and have 3.0 N/A V8s with no rev limits but an engine allowance per year still.

Or if you want a laugh, give them X litres of fuel to use per race and they can use whatever engine they want. All of a sudden developing for power and efficiency without it being in a very narrow scope would bring proper innovation that might actually be transferable to road cars etc.

In an open formula, the rich teams will be even further ahead than they are now.

F1 is not road relevant. Never has been, never will be, unless they change the rules to include multiple seats, fenders, emissions controls, WLTP requirements, etc.

This. Endurance Sports Car and Prototype racing had / has road relevance, F1 never has and even now, still isn’t. The fuel flow limited formula isn’t road relevant either due to NOx emissions concerns. At no time in history has F1 been road relevant.

[sosic2121]

I don't even know why they bother with all the cost and complexity of hybrid (or even turbo) in a sport.

It's a sport. Just save a load of cash, make it more fun to watch and have 3.0 N/A V8s with no rev limits but an engine allowance per year still.

Or if you want a laugh, give them X litres of fuel to use per race and they can use whatever engine they want. All of a sudden developing for power and efficiency without it being in a very narrow scope would bring proper innovation that might actually be transferable to road cars etc.

In an open formula, the rich teams will be even further ahead than they are now.

F1 is not road relevant. Never has been, never will be, unless they change the rules to include multiple seats, fenders, emissions controls, WLTP requirements, etc.

This. Endurance Sports Car and Prototype racing had / has road relevance, F1 never has and even now, still isn’t. The fuel flow limited formula isn’t road relevant either due to NoX emission concerns. At no time in history has F1 been road relevant.

Than give us NA v10/v12!

Any idea about emissions of 1.6 V6? Too much NOx? Is this curable?

[Hoffman900]

In an open formula, the rich teams will be even further ahead than they are now.

F1 is not road relevant. Never has been, never will be, unless they change the rules to include multiple seats, fenders, emissions controls, WLTP requirements, etc.

This. Endurance Sports Car and Prototype racing had / has road relevance, F1 never has and even now, still isn’t. The fuel flow limited formula isn’t road relevant either due to NoX emission concerns. At no time in history has F1 been road relevant.

Than give us NA v10/v12!

Any idea about emissions of 1.6 V6? Too much NOx? Is this curable?

No, because no one wants to build those either. Manufacturers want no involvement in any of that. It would have to become a spec series with someone like Cosworth being paid to be sole supplier. Without manufacturers, there goes the money, and without the money, there goes the prestige, and without the prestige, there is a lack of interest in anyone wanting to sink money into the sport.

Luca Marmorini gave an 8 page interview in Race Engine Technology Issue 100 (Feb 2017) where he gets into this, the early part of the rules development and engine development under the current rule set, and honestly debunks a bunch of stuff I still see repeated here in late 2022.

He did say the only transfer is some of the combustion ideas, turbochargers, and the hybrid technology, but to be fair, the LMP diesels were already what the F1 engines are for the most part, before F1 even switched. They’re very, very similar and have been going back like 15 years now. Your heavy lifting in IC engine technology is for heavy diesel, stuff that can’t be electrified because the energy density isn’t there with electric yet.

[MadMax]

Mercedes-Benz's annual R&D budget is over three times F1's total worth - their 2022 budget for road car R&D was €7.2billion. BMW's was over €6billion, Honda is in the same ballpark. The idea that someone would use F1 as an R&D lab for future engine technology is laughable really. More likely is to use stuff they already have and then finesse it to work in F1. It's what Mercedes did with the turbo - they went to the truck division and borrowed from there.

F1 is not road relevant.

[PlatinumZealot]

As F1 goes smaller and smaller with combustion I thought I’d imagine a straight five in the back of an F1 car rather than the proposed 50/50 v6 for 2026 as it’d be smaller and lighter then I came across this video on YouTube



The sound would be amazing at 13-15k rpm and you could still run it on hybrid power

If you do straight five.. Might as well go V10 and call it a day.

Straight five will need a very fancy stiffening structure. Perhaps you slant the engine to the left by 30 degrees. The only advantage I see is tucking the turbo inside of the structure.. But then you have an engine that is heavier on ones side.

[JordanMugen]

The new Ferrari 296 GTB twin-turbo V6 has a 120-degree Vee angle and actually sounds very good, many say better than the twin-turbo V8 in the Ferrari F8.

Perhaps a simple change of Vee angle (from the existing 90-degrees) could make the 1.6L turbo V6 sound better?

Edit -- The Ferrari 499P uses similar 120-degree V6 engine albeit designed as a stressed member, this is what it sounds like:



Better than the 90-degree V6 of the Grand Prix car engine? The sound is more like an inline-six or V12 perhaps?

[Stu]

As F1 goes smaller and smaller with combustion I thought I’d imagine a straight five in the back of an F1 car rather than the proposed 50/50 v6 for 2026 as it’d be smaller and lighter then I came across this video on YouTube



The sound would be amazing at 13-15k rpm and you could still run it on hybrid power

If you do straight five.. Might as well go V10 and call it a day.

Straight five will need a very fancy stiffening structure. Perhaps you slant the engine to the left by 30 degrees. The only advantage I see is tucking the turbo inside of the structure.. But then you have an engine that is heavier on ones side.

I’ve seen this argument used as a hammer against in-line fours as well.
Then I look at all of the current V6 installations and what do I see? A substantial stiffening structure between the engine mounting points and the rear chassis structure.

[JordanMugen]

As F1 goes smaller and smaller with combustion I thought I’d imagine a straight five in the back of an F1 car rather than the proposed 50/50 v6 for 2026 as it’d be smaller and lighter then I came across this video on YouTube



The sound would be amazing at 13-15k rpm and you could still run it on hybrid power

If you do straight five.. Might as well go V10 and call it a day.

Straight five will need a very fancy stiffening structure. Perhaps you slant the engine to the left by 30 degrees. The only advantage I see is tucking the turbo inside of the structure.. But then you have an engine that is heavier on ones side.

I’ve seen this argument used as a hammer against in-line fours as well.
Then I look at all of the current V6 installations and what do I see? A substantial stiffening structure between the engine mounting points and the rear chassis structure.

Indeed!

Why not align F1 with Super Formula / (old) DTM engine regulations? Mercedes, BMW, Audi, Honda, Toyota and Nissan all have engines to these regulations already. The control turbo in those regulations, for example, should reduce costs considerably to the freedoms in the Formula One regulations.

There is indeed some stiffening structure built into the cam cover, and gearbox mounts built into the engine block, as you say:
Honda HR-414E

[coaster]

The inline 5 really needed to be spruiked at the end of the 300cc 97mm piston era when V10 design was still 'ripe on the vine', a new formula maybe? Call it Grand prix legends? Like the old game, guys wrestling the steering wheel, loud screaming motors?

[pierrre]

The new Ferrari 296 GTB twin-turbo V6 has a 120-degree Vee angle and actually sounds very good, many say better than the twin-turbo V8 in the Ferrari F8.

Perhaps a simple change of Vee angle (from the existing 90-degrees) could make the 1.6L turbo V6 sound better?

Edit -- The Ferrari 499P uses similar 120-degree V6 engine albeit designed as a stressed member, this is what it sounds like:



Better than the 90-degree V6 of the Grand Prix car engine? The sound is more like an inline-six or V12 perhaps?

the sound of the 296gtb is actually not from its vee angle. they engineered the exhaust system for a higher pitch note by combining the two banks to meet and share acoustics at the exhaust tip. was thinking of doing an article on this on my page and site

[Tommy Cookers]

the sound of the 296gtb is actually not from its vee angle

well .....
it is
because it has 6 equal firing intervals of 120 deg
(how could it be otherwise ?)

[Edax]

I see racing as a design solution. One way to solve the equation is to build a big heavy powerful car the other is to built a light nimble car.

In some series both philosophies have raced together on track. Eg the Bentley Blower vs the Alfa romeo and MG midget. Or the Mini Cooper vs the Regals. In the end I guess both can be made to go fast.

But I always find the lighter solution more elegant than the “strap on more cylinders” approach. So I am not a big fan of big na engines.

I always found it a pity that the design route brabham was on was cut off by regulations. I would be very much interested what modern designers could come up with starting with an I4 turbo in combination with ground effect cars. Maybe the purist will complain about the lack of ear piercing noise but racing and engineering wise it could IMO be very interesting.