2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[WhiteBlue]

Why don't we just add twin electric compounding turbos to the existing 2.4ltr V8 plus the direct injection systems and be done with it? That would be far cheaper than building a boring new 4cyl engine that no one wants in F1 !!!

Because it is the wrong engine to apply those things. It is simply not designed for them and it would do no good compared to a purpose build engine.

[WhiteBlue]

"If I talk to Renault, they say that if we don't introduce this engine for 2013 they will leave F1; if I talk to Mercedes and Ferrari, they ask me to delay the introduction for a few years. They aren't against the rules, they just wanted them postponed."

Nothing new then. The engines will come. In the meantime a window dressing operation is actioned.

[xpensive]

"If I talk to Renault, they say that if we don't introduce this engine for 2013 they will leave F1; if I talk to Mercedes and Ferrari, they ask me to delay the introduction for a few years. They aren't against the rules, they just wanted them postponed."

Nothing new then. The engines will come. In the meantime a window dressing operation is actioned.

Oh but it is WB, now it's France against the rest of the world, but it's indeed interesting to follow your ongoing revisions
of your own, dead-certain as always, previous positions on who is for and against the new engine formula.

[FW17]

"If I talk to Renault, they say that if we don't introduce this engine for 2013 they will leave F1; if I talk to Mercedes and Ferrari, they ask me to delay the introduction for a few years. They aren't against the rules, they just wanted them postponed."

Nothing new then. The engines will come. In the meantime a window dressing operation is actioned.

Why are other manufacturers position not mentioned? Are BMW, VW, Honda, Toyota, Peugeot etc not interested?

[Giblet]

These teams are a little gun shy right now I think after pulling out of the sport.

I have a feeling someone will buy PURE of they manage to set up a good shop, maybe even VW.

[FW17]

These teams are a little gun shy right now I think after pulling out of the sport.

I have a feeling someone will buy PURE of they manage to set up a good shop, maybe even VW.

In the early 90's Group C sports cars used a engine formula which was identical to F1, to benefit both series with cross development engine programs.

Will FIA with the new found association with ACO be able to bring in a sports car formula which could rake up more manufactures interest in F1 (1.6 in f1, 2.0 in sports cars with same architecture)?

[Ferraripilot]

Silly question, but this new formula keeps the 4v per cylinder max rule correct?

[triart3d]

Must read:
http://www.ecv1.com/e-motore.htm



Position Rear, Longitudinal
Cylinders 4 in line
Diameter/Stroke 88.5 x 71.5 mm
Total Capacity 1759 cm3
Cyl-Head Type TRIFLUX twin flow
Valves 2 Inlet/2 Exhaust per cylinder, DOHC
Compression Ratio 7.5:1
Power 600 CV at 8000 rpm
Torque 55 kgm at 5000 rpm
Boosting Two K.K.K. K26 Turbochargers and two air-air intercoolers
(one for each turbocharger)
Injection/Ignition WEBER/MAGNETI MARELLI IA.W. integrated ignition and injection with electronic boost control

[alelanza]

Silly question, but this new formula keeps the 4v per cylinder max rule correct?

I've yet to read any official document that goes into any details of that nature.

[Giblet]

I like that teams are used to homologation now, so locking for a year hear and there then opening parts of the enign up for development would be a good balance.

[Ferraripilot]

Anyone else expecting there to be a substantial variation in power and torque curves from the turbo motors? This might make things somewhat interesting. Some motors will create great power at one end yet suffer at the other, and I further see more, "ah haa" moments with things like exhaust manifolds which will assist in changing turbo lag points etc. Possibly even nozzle effects inside the exhaust manifold with the intentions on keeping the turbo spooled. Just thinking out loud here.

[Giblet]

It would be nice to hear terms like "power track" again. Maybe a Red Bull with huge DF and a dainty Renault would win on some tracks, and teams up on power on them could have advantages at Monza and Canada.

[Ferraripilot]

It would be nice to hear terms like "power track" again. Maybe a Red Bull with huge DF and a dainty Renault would win on some tracks, and teams up on power on them could have advantages at Monza and Canada.

That would indeed be a very welcome change IMO. A car which is great at Suzuka could be terrible at Monza yet somewhat ok in Monaco. Talk about an interesting race weekend at every single race, rather than the standard monotony of the day which is basically a hypothesised outcome which is 9/10 times correct.

[alelanza]

Not for me, powerful turbo cars on a poor chassis made for very boring 'Villeneuve Train' races, with the exception maybe of Jarana 81. Seeing the better chassises stuck through the twisty bits only to see the Ferrari or Renaults pull away in the straights robbed us of many interesting battles IMO. And that was only because you had lighter NA vs heavier thirstier turbos, with the new formula it would be everyone on turbos and similar chassis restrictions.

[FW17]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5yQQiVw ... r_embedded[/youtube]

I cant believe that people want to be stuck with the current engines for ever and ever.
Essence of F1 is seeing new thing ever race, other than that it is just as any other racing series.

No ground effects
Standard tyres
Same aero every year

Now they want to keep the same engine with no scope of moving forward because of the noise. How lame is F1 now