2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[hecti]

winners= F1 fans and F1 in general
looser= Renault and WB

...is that a fair way to sum it up?

[strad]

December 2nd, 2010 and I'll be darned...who could have guessed?

.
I'm so xcited for you =D>

[King Six]

Thats good news for me. The only thing in the new engine regulations i didnt like was that it had to be 4 cylinders.

But why? I still haven't read a decent explanation as to why the V6 will be so much better than the L4. Especially since the power, revs and capacity will remain the same. If anything the V6's will be heavier, bigger and more of a hindrence (when compared to L4's of the same spec/power/capacity)

This is f1technical, explanations on a postcard!

If you come back to me with "the sound" then leave your membership at the door.

[xpensive]

Thanx strad, why I' having one xtra tonite to celebrate that and my relocation to Santa Fe Springs, CA this fall!

[King Six]

Thats good news for me. The only thing in the new engine regulations i didnt like was that it had to be 4 cylinders.

But why? I still haven't read a decent explanation as to why the V6 will be so much better than the L4. Especially since the power, revs and capacity will remain the same. If anything the V6's will be heavier, bigger and more of a hindrence (when compared to L4's of the same spec/power/capacity)

This is f1technical, explanations on a postcard!

If you come back to me with "the sound" then leave your membership at the door.

I don't like my posts being buried at the bottom of a page, and it's a genuine technical question of interest. [-o<

[CMSMJ1]

@ King Six - it is a more efficient installation and use of the engine as a stressed member.

You don;t need a cradle for it etc.

Also, it is more in keeping with the "image" of F! as a techincal sport..

I4s are ten a penny...they are mundane

(they might sound --- too..)

I'd have preferred a limited fuel tank and a capacity limit and then set the geeks loose to solve the problem of going 300km as fast as you can

[HampusA]

But why? I still haven't read a decent explanation as to why the V6 will be so much better than the L4. Especially since the power, revs and capacity will remain the same. If anything the V6's will be heavier, bigger and more of a hindrence (when compared to L4's of the same spec/power/capacity)

This is f1technical, explanations on a postcard!

If you come back to me with "the sound" then leave your membership at the door.

I think sound is a fair opinion. And the fact that Ferrari doesn´t need or care about what technology they can get from 4potters in F1.

For them, V6´s are the most logical, next generation of Ferraris will most definitely be T6´s or T8´s.

[alelanza]

Anyway, my final predictions for 2013is the following;
A 1.6 liter turbo-V6 restricted to 12 kRpm, as well as a 2.0 Bar boost (3.0 absolute) and a fuelflow of 45 cc/second.

According to Scarbs it will be an L4 with 37.7 cc/s if my figuring isn't too far off.

December 2nd, 2010 and I'll be darned...who could have guessed?

X, I'd say that's Mpressive , also congrats on not having to 'eat an entire Caterham vehicle'

...I don't believe for 1 minute that Ferrari alone brought about this change but I guess if you have an extreme allergy to Ferrari then pigs can fly.
...

Exactly

[donskar]

Can't help myself from rolling around in my own humble clairvoyance, let's do this one more time,December 2nd, 2010;

Anyway, my final predictions for 2013is the following;
A 1.6 liter turbo-V6 restricted to 12 kRpm, as well as a 2.0 Bar boost (3.0 absolute) and a fuelflow of 45 cc/second.

According to Scarbs it will be an L4 with 37.7 cc/s if my figuring isn't too far off.

=D> Thank Valhalla that you have avoided the dreaded Xcessive humility! =D>

[747heavy]

.......
If anything the V6's will be heavier, bigger and more of a hindrence (when compared to L4's of the same spec/power/capacity)

what´s your reasoning/technical explaination behind this statements?
what´s your definition for "bigger" and " more of a hindrence"?
why does it need to be "heavier"? (keeping in mind, that most dimensions and the weigth wil most likely be defined by the rules anyway, as is the case now, and was proposed for the I4)

[xpensive]

[...]

[andrew]

You can be very proud to predict that Ferrari would force F1 into such an idiotic decision, but it remains to be seen if you fuel flow prediction materialises. The V6 may not be able to meet the target that was set for the I4. I'll be interested to learn what will happen there.

Just want to go back to this. I have done a bit of digging and have found that Ferrari were not the only team to voice their concerns. In fact Mercedes had voiced concerns and Cosworth had asked for clarification. It is also worth noting that Renault were the only engine manufacturer to support the 4 cylinder format.

Source

So to recap, I think I am safe in saying, am I not Gentlemen, that Ferrari and Mercedes and Cosworth look like they were against the proposed 4 cylinder engines. Renault also appear not to the 100% against the V6 and just want a format agreed upon.

So to say that Ferrari have forced F1 into an idiotic decision is wrong.

[DaveKillens]

"We want clarity," Cosworth boss Mark Gallagher told GP Week. "If it's a 1.6-litre motor, fine, we'll be there. If not, we've got a V8 that we can continue with. We're agnostic. We don't have to have a V8 or V12 or an in-line four. If the F1 rules required a single-cylinder two-stroke, we'd be there. The FIA president has said he's listening and taking in everything we're saying. We just want a resolution.

http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/52022.html

So it's a compromise, and in it's haste to close the deal and shut everyone up, mistakes may have been made.

"There's a big concern on our side because the new rules have no cost restrictions applied," Gallagher added. "So the manufacturers can spend a huge amount of money and we would have a space race around the new engine formula, which was never the idea.

"Everyone agreed that wasn't the idea, but unfortunately that's what happened. So we've also said to the FIA that a delay might be the right thing to do. I think all the teams, not just our customers, don't need to be spending more money on engine technology."

[WhiteBlue]

You can be very proud to predict that Ferrari would force F1 into such an idiotic decision, but it remains to be seen if you fuel flow prediction materialises. The V6 may not be able to meet the target that was set for the I4. I'll be interested to learn what will happen there.

Seriously, can you demonstrate that Ferrari were behind this? Do you reasonably think that one team was enough to change the proposed engine format? Why do you dislike Ferrari so much?

Surely a V6 engine is far more relevant to road going vehicle technology than an I4?

For those who never pay attention I will explain it all again. The new engines hinge on the presence of Cosworth as an independant supplier and a profitable business. Without Cosworth the manufacturers would fall back into a spending war that only benefits Ferrari. They are a team with almost limitless resources compared to a small high tech firm like Cosworth. Cosworth are happy to develop any engine if the budgets or resources are limited. That was the plan that everybody agreed to in September 2010. Then the WMSC decided on the I4 configuration that was also agreed by Ferrari in the expert group. They did not like it but they said they would respect the decision. Some days later Montezemolo announced that he would try to overthrow the plan. From that day no word was heared about the resource restrictions for engines any more. Obviously Ferrari refused to sign an agreement as part of their plan to torpedo the I4.

Cosworth then got cold feet because without spending restrictions they would have to charge their customers more than for the old V8s. Mercedes also got concerned. Not only do they have a problem with bigger budgets in case of a spending war, they also feared that they would have to supply more than three teams in the case of a Cosworth departure which they are not set up to do. They would not get the board approval to increase their operations or their spending in F1. So indirectly Ferrari found a way to stall the whole plan by the threat of a spending race. And their whole pupose was to get a higher cylinder count to have a better marketing fit for their road cars.

Now Ferrari got what they wanted and nobody will care that the engines will be more expensive to manufacture and that they will need more fuel than a I4. Every expert will tell you that a V6 is more expensive to make and that it will have less power in a fuel limited formula as they plan to do. I reckon that the FiA will have to revise the fuel flow target to accomodate the higher consumption. One more reason to despise Ferrari and Montezemolo.

A V6 is a lot less relevant to road cars except you happen to work for Ferrari. All manufacturers world wide are reducing displacement and cylinder count by adding turbos. The bulk of cars sold in 2014 will have three and four cylinders. Next year BMW will start to introduce I3 petrol turbo engines for most of their models. Fiat have already started to do it and those cars will sell in huge numbers compared to the bigger gas guzzling six and eight cylinders. I have already posted several times that Merc offer their top of the line S-class with a turbo diesel I4. The downsizing in road cars works for racing cars just the same.

The 1.5L BMW turbo I4 was the most powerfull engine in the eighties until they started to limit the boost pressure. It also had a beautiful sound. I repeat it again, there are no technical or rational reasons for F1 to go V6. It simply suits the Ferrari marketing but it hurts everybody else in F1.

[rjsa]

WB, the I4 is not the engine of choice for high end cars. And it won't be for a long time.

I think you drive a BMW1, right?

http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/m ... index.html