mx_tifosi wrote:
- Getting more/same from less.
- More fuel efficient.
- Lighter, more compact.
In the context of F1, why would it mean getting more from less? and why more efficient?
Also why would they be ligther or more compact? You may have smaller cylinders, but how much smaller would the actual engine be?
Once you fit variable geometry turbos, intercoolers, some sort of anti lag mechanism, etc. is it really more compact and/or lighter?
machin wrote:Plus, if it were say a 2litre turbo, because it relies on higher torque and less revs to get the same sort of power (if not less if HERS & KERS made up the deficiet) it would last longer too (less stress on moving parts), so you could have fewer engines per year (without the need to increase component weight).
You make gains on friction, but then higher torque would mean more robust parts all across the drivetrain are needed as well. Is the balance favorable towards turbo or NA in the end?
WhiteBlue wrote:
All the high efficiency engines nowadays are turbo engines. The efficiency benefits from higher compression and the turbo
takes additional motion energy out of the exhaust which otherwise would go to waste.
True, now, on an engine designed towards mainly full throttle application, how much efficiency do you really gain in the end?
I won't comment on the diesel part because that's really a whole different discussion.
Alejandro L.