2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[WhiteBlue]

Man W/B...I would think almost the complete opposite. Has the FIA set the boost limit?

There is nothing in the published data and it would not make sense from a regulatory point of view. The new formula is fuel restricted and not air restricted. If you decide for one method you better stick to it and leave the other side of the equation open.

Turbo pressure for a target power of 560 hp can be easily calculated. The displacement and rev factors are both 0.66. If you apply that to the old engine you have 333 hp. To get to 560 hp you have to boost by 1.68.

[strad]

Then I think it will tend toward low by that I mean 9:1-9.5:1 compression, and as much boost as they can get away with.

[WhiteBlue]

I disagree. They will try to run the highest possible compression which will be determined by the way they run the combustion process. It will be almost certainly spray guided with central injection from the center top of the cylinder at the end of the compression phase. In that combustion mode they will have the leanest combustion with the highest lambda in homogenous mode and the best cooling effect from the vaporization of the fuel.

[Shaddock]

I disagree. They will try to run the highest possible compression which will be determined by the way they run the combustion process. It will be almost certainly spray guided with central injection from the center top of the cylinder at the end of the compression phase. In that combustion mode they will have the leanest combustion with the highest lambda in homogenous mode and the best cooling effect from the vaporization of the fuel.

The higher the comp ratio the better the fuel consumption, but ultimately the less boost they will be able to run. It will also fill up the low and mid-range torque curve nicely, maybe drive ability will be just as important as outright power. Turbo engines don't like lean and will get hot very quickly in this state. My guess would be about 10:1 - the old Honda V6 ran 9.4:1 in it's final guise.

[WhiteBlue]

The Panamera engine with 10.5 : 1 is also a turbo engine.

[747heavy]

Interesting interview with Cosworth

Indeed very interesting & funny coming from an "engine guy"

If there is one that’s way out ahead of the others then the FIA will recognise that it has failed, along with the car manufacturers, to come up with adequate checks and balances to prevent that happening.

It’s not in anyone’s interest for one engine manufacturer to run away with the ball. The engine as a differentiator of success on the track isn’t a pre-requisite. The engine is there to do a job, to power the cars around the track. It should be up to the chassis manufacturers to differentiate and the drivers to differentiate between who wins and who loses.

I think the Australians have a name for it, they call it the "tall puppy syndrom".
It does not really pay off, if you try to be better then average, because the powers to be, will bring you back to the smallest common denominator anyway.

This warrants the question, why the engine manufactures don´t simply pool their development budget´s and come up with a common F1 powertrain, because that´s where we will end up when the dust has settled.

It´s funny for an engine guy, to voluntary leave the limelight to the chassis/aero guys.
Which makes you wonder, while the engine manufactures want to do F1 in the first place, and may explains why Mercedes wanted to get involved on the chassis side, with it´s own team.

[autogyro]

I think the engine makers are beginning to see the reduced return on investment for developing what amounts to a spec engine, in a time when the future of the internal combustion engine is becoming less and less secure.
If the estimate of 10 percent of road vehicles becoming all electric by 2015 happens, then the market for road ic engines is set to begin an inevitable and relatively rapid decline.
Red Bull have a product to promote that is not connected with the motor industry or racing but it does have a health and fitness connection (at least in the minds of the buying public). A Red Bull engine or one paid for and labeled as one based on an energy conscious formula, IMO is the most sensible way to move forward for the best financial reward. I am betting that VW are aware of this.
If the FIA continue to tighten the regulations and further restrict inovation in energy saving within motor sport, then most of the transitory development on hybrids and EVs will inevitably happen outside their remit.
They are dangerously sitting on the fence at present.

[Shaddock]

The Panamera engine with 10.5 : 1 is also a turbo engine.

A light pressure turbo system of 0.85 bar at just 2500rpm and 0.4 at 6500rpm. The engine was designed for torque not bhp. 500bhp from a 4.8L V8 barely breaks 100bhp/litre, that why Porsche can get away with a high ratio.

But it does beats the Audi 2.5T with it comp ratio =D>

If the estimate of 10 percent of road vehicles becoming all electric by 2015 happens, then the market for road ic engines is set to begin an inevitable and relatively rapid decline.

Lets hope not, all electric cars can't travel as far as a man on a horse in a day, that's not progress

[WhiteBlue]

Indeed very interesting & funny coming from an "engine guy"

If there is one that’s way out ahead of the others then the FIA will recognise that it has failed, along with the car manufacturers, to come up with adequate checks and balances to prevent that happening.

It’s not in anyone’s interest for one engine manufacturer to run away with the ball. The engine as a differentiator of success on the track isn’t a pre-requisite. The engine is there to do a job, to power the cars around the track. It should be up to the chassis manufacturers to differentiate and the drivers to differentiate between who wins and who loses.

I think the Australians have a name for it, they call it the "tall puppy syndrom".
It does not really pay off, if you try to be better then average, because the powers to be, will bring you back to the smallest common denominator anyway.

This warrants the question, why the engine manufactures don´t simply pool their development budget´s and come up with a common F1 powertrain, because that´s where we will end up when the dust has settled.

It´s funny for an engine guy, to voluntary leave the limelight to the chassis/aero guys. Which makes you wonder, while the engine manufactures want to do F1 in the first place, and may explains why Mercedes wanted to get involved on the chassis side, with it´s own team.

The point is that FOTA rules F1 these days. Nothing gets decided against a FOTA majority and naturally the teams insist that the chassis has to make the difference. Gallagher simply repeats what he knows is the truth. It does not necessarily mean that it is the best way for F1.

It would be better for F1 IMO to spend more money on drive train developments and less on aero. There will still be differentiation between drive train manufacturers. Mid term all top five teams will have their own engine and drive train development.

[autogyro]

The Panamera engine with 10.5 : 1 is also a turbo engine.

A light pressure turbo system of 0.85 bar at just 2500rpm and 0.4 at 6500rpm. The engine was designed for torque not bhp. 500bhp from a 4.8L V8 barely breaks 100bhp/litre, that why Porsche can get away with a high ratio.

But it does beats the Audi 2.5T with it comp ratio =D>

If the estimate of 10 percent of road vehicles becoming all electric by 2015 happens, then the market for road ic engines is set to begin an inevitable and relatively rapid decline.

Lets hope not, all electric cars can't travel as far as a man on a horse in a day, that's not progress

What relevence has that comment? I would like to see a horse go 200 miles at 70 mph. Another silly anti EV comment.

[Shaddock]

If the estimate of 10 percent of road vehicles becoming all electric by 2015 happens, then the market for road ic engines is set to begin an inevitable and relatively rapid decline.

Lets hope not, all electric cars can't travel as far as a man on a horse in a day, that's not progress

What relevence has that comment? I would like to see a horse go 200 miles at 70 mph. Another silly anti EV comment.

Which 'all electric' car can do 200 miles @ 70mph in one go?

The point being that 'all electric' isn't the way forward at present, and a hybrid system is more practical.

[autogyro]

The point is that the comparison between a horse is invalid and cannot be quantified.
Many EV car specs give over 200 miles range and speeds way faster than 70 mph.
It is well within EV technology to achieve the figures I quote.
Electric is the way forward, hybrid is simply a market compromise to suit the car makers and the oil lobby/ government revenue chain.

The regulations in F1 as suggested up to now on this powertrain thread are to pay lip service to energy recovery and the use of electrical motive power.
This is why the move away from flywheel energy storage and towards battery development in the framing of the FIA regulations for KERS.

Centralising and making energy production far more efficient and environmentaly friendly is essential if reduced CO2 demands are to be met. The only logical way to do this is to get rid of the liquid fuel distribution network and replace ic engined vehicles with electric.

If the FOTA continues to ignore this and forces inovation into chassis only, it will take F1 out of future relevent technology development in the real world and could easily be FIs demise.

If the FOTA must force this technical direction, then Mr Whitmarsh should have the decency at least to reply to my last e-mail, which suggested an EV formula to be established to run alongside the F1 championship races. This would make sure that F1 continued into the future, the electrical inevitability of which most still cannot see for the motor head blinkers they wear.

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=396838

I can't believe what I read. The ink hasn't dried on the new 2013 F1 engine formula and Montezemolo is already lobbying to overthrow it.

Four cylinders is not Formula One. We will not be building any for our street cars. For the top class of racing it sounds a bit pathetic. Why couldn't we have a V6 turbo? We should not confuse affordable with cheap. If there is the slightest possibility to delay the four cylinder, I will look for it. We see a chance. We need unity.

Yeah, we need unity, that bit is true. And it means that Ferrari and Monte stand by the decisions when it goes against their wish. Monte is a pathetic looser.

[xpensive]

I have a feeling that Montezemolo would not make this statement unless he knew that he already had support within FOTA,
the only manufacturer to gain marketing kudos from the 1.6 I4 is VW, which do'nt even participate, what is going on here?

[autogyro]

The answer would be to make it formula libre and open up the engine to anything within the fuel restrictions.
Then we could all watch Ferrari take their justified position, Last.