Throttle less engines , opens up many loopholes as it relates to variable time and lift.
Teams would have a field day. But i guess that could be made legal to promote efficiency.
One can only hope. Can't wait to see what they develop!ringo wrote: Teams would have a field day. But i guess that could be made legal to promote efficiency.
Not even then, assume you have the right materials to withstand the heat, that's all well and good but where will the exhaust thrust be coming from? After all you are now reducing the load via less fuel, this will still reduce the flow going out through the exhaust the way it does now. The whole operation may be more efficient (or not), but your exhaust gasses are still tied to engine load, regardless of said load being controlled by a plate, valvetrain, A/F ratio or whichever other method you wish to throw at it.WhiteBlue wrote: Unless they find a way to make the valves resistant against hot oxygen they will probably have to do the trick with the over stoechiometric combustion in the exhaust system that they do now.
by....autogyro wrote:Sorry to paste this link again but all the answers to non throttle control over torque and exhaust gas flow have been dealt with years ago
... so no complete escape from some form of throttle....autogyro's link wrote:Supercharger throttling was used as well to achieve idling
I don't think that you can say that. The fuel can always be burned lean or rich in any F1 system that we know. The dials on the steering wheels of current F1 cars have a massive impact on fuel consumption. And the variation of oxygen always drags five times the amount of inert gases through the engine. So the gas flow is never directly proportional to the fuel burnt.xpensive wrote: the volumeflow is directly dependent on the amount of fuel burnt.
The team persevered with a 3-litre voiturette as well as a 5.6 litre Grand Prix car winning numerous races and making 1913 their most successful year.. Many consider the 3-litre car Peugeot's masterpiece that was producing for that time an astonishing 30 bhp/litre.
The laydown BMW (72 degrees to the left) was offset to the right side of the car and I don't think we will see this happening in F1 again.xpensive wrote:What was the angle of the 1986 Brabham.BMW, 30 degrees, problems were with the oil circulatiuon as I understand.?
But why would you keep the exhaust on the downside?