2014 too slow? (or not, as the case may be)

[iotar__]

I cant recall when was the last time drivers making such comments after the 1st test. And my guess is that if they are saying this year's car is slow, its most likely they will be slow unless Pirelli change the tyres compound or if some team can find a loophole that is at big as the double diffusers. Gaining a few tenths is always possible, but a few seconds between now at Australia? I think thats too ambitious.

At the moment, I believe the primary focus for the team right now is to make sure the cars are reliable and fuel efficient enough to finish the race instead of pure speed, and we are most unlikely to see drivers pushing their cars at 100% all the time and this could be another step down from last year where drivers had to drive slow to preserve their tyres.

Another thread about it ? Can you recall such big changes and running at fraction of engine power too? And what do you mean "another step down after tyres" - tyres also changed for conservative ones. What exactly "drivers" said? They said different thing, just because sensationalist titles were slapped on combination of unconnected opinions to create feeble thesis there's an "issue", "crisis" and big story that will last couple of weeks before everyone forgets? Or maybe it will be brought up every time favourite driver/team will lose because of something.

It's not a matter of opinion, either it happens or not. Say what you consider "close to GP2" in numbers - qualifying, fastest to fastest, on average, in % or seconds and we'll see after the season. It's another meaningless subject as far as I'm concerned like tyres hysteria previously. It's a transition season (or rather half a season) when it comes to performance = engines and to some extent aero, jumping to conclusions after one early test is silly.

As usual real problems are not discussed, crisis in F1 is not about comparisons to GP2 but about losing competitiveness and straight road to customer cars, costs are obvious but it's a different story. Engine formula limited challengers to 3 teams leaving the rest even further behind, Renault problems may mean initially 2 + 1 teams competing at the highest level and no one's worried. They removed further requirements to call a team F1 manufacturer, soon enough they'll be taking half a car from big teams. Then there's a matter of "not pushing 100%" (Hamilton must be disgusted or is he?) and "random" results (reliability) and no one's panicking, which leads me to conclusion it was all lies and noise to serve their own particular interests. Just like for me - too slow ,"like GP2", not safe etc.

So instead of GP2 comparisons I'm more interested in what exactly are they planning to do for 2015 to avoid everyone but three (four) teams to be on a back foot. I'm guessing big, fat nothing .

[SectorOne]

So when the lights go out they will be about 30kg´s heavier and about 100 horses down on average or something like that.

(still faster then a damn HRT)

What makes you think they'll be 100 horses down? More like 10 horses up.

They will have a maximum of 760 ish horses for 33s of the lap.
Last year you had a base 760 horses for 100% of the lap. On top of that you had 80hp for 5-6 seconds.

What makes you think they will be 10 horses up?
For about two thirds of the lap they will approximately run around with 600 horsepower minus the heat ers.

[rscsr]

So when the lights go out they will be about 30kg´s heavier and about 100 horses down on average or something like that.

(still faster then a damn HRT)

What makes you think they'll be 100 horses down? More like 10 horses up.

They will have a maximum of 760 ish horses for 33s of the lap.
Last year you had a base 760 horses for 100% of the lap. On top of that you had 80hp for 5-6 seconds.

What makes you think they will be 10 horses up?
For about two thirds of the lap they will approximately run around with 600 horsepower minus the heat ers.

They usually use full throttle 60-70%. So you basically have the 600+160 bhp at least half the lap.

[SectorOne]

They usually use full throttle 60-70%. So you basically have the 600+160 bhp at least half the lap.

Which is the same for the V8 engine pumping out 760 horses all the time with an addition of 80 horsepower for a couple of more seconds during those 60-70% of the lap.
I still can´t see how you can be up on horsepower compared to last year.

[rscsr]

They usually use full throttle 60-70%. So you basically have the 600+160 bhp at least half the lap.

Which is the same for the V8 engine pumping out 760 horses all the time with an addition of 80 horsepower for a couple of more seconds during those 60-70% of the lap.
I still can´t see how you can be up on horsepower compared to last year.

Because you have the power basically in the whole rev range you are using, compared to the V8, which are extremely peaky.
see here (from Race Engine Technology issue +072):

Power Curves comparison of the V8 and V6 (forecast):


or better would be this post from blanchimont:
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... &start=127

[SectorOne]

Because you have the power basically in the whole rev range you are using, compared to the V8, which are extremely peaky.

True, but you have a gearbox which make sure you are almost always in the range where you produce the horsepower.
(With V8´s you had several different ratios for several different tracks, with a V6 you get one set for 20 tracks)
(or one set for 10 and then you can change once)

In a flat out run through the gears you are using about 2000 rpm of the V8 engine. And approximately a range of 4000 in very slow corners.

In the slow corners you are still traction limited, which is the case for the new engines as well and is a limit set mostly by the tire itself. Which with the new even harder compounds will be more compromised then the softer more grippy tires of 2013.
In theory at least.

[motobaleno]

Because you have the power basically in the whole rev range you are using, compared to the V8, which are extremely peaky.

that's not really an advantage in a race car since you always use a very limited rev range. It could be important in a road car but in a race it could be more a problem than an advantage due to added traction issues out of corners

[Juzh]

All valid points sector. There's just a matter of drivers saying how they feel there's more power than it used to be.

[SectorOne]

All valid points sector. There's just a matter of drivers saying how they feel there's more power than it used to be.

It´s probably because of two things, the power delivery creates the illusion of more power.
And more torque so that once you are not traction limited it will pull a bit harder for a little while.

For the first one, go drive a BMW M3 and the equivalent Mercedes C-class AMG.
The AMG is going to feel like it has much more power but pit them together and you´ll realize they are about dead even.

Another comparison of power perception for me was me owning a 6 cylinder BMW then borrowed a 4-cylinder one with more power.
The perception of power and pull the 6 cylinder gave was far more impressive then the 4 even though the 4 was probably a bit faster.

[rscsr]

Because you have the power basically in the whole rev range you are using, compared to the V8, which are extremely peaky.

True, but you have a gearbox which make sure you are almost always in the range where you produce the horsepower.

In a flat out run through the gears you are using about 2000 rpm of the V8 engine. And approximately a range of 4000 in very slow corners.

In the slow corners you are still traction limited, which is the case for the new engines as well and is a limit set mostly by the tire itself. Which with the new even harder compounds will be more compromised then the softer more grippy tires of 2013.
In theory at least.

Have you checked the link to blanchimont's post?

He created these two beautiful charts:
http://imageshack.com/a/img513/9097/pqzi.png
http://imageshack.com/a/img89/5255/5f06.png
The upper one is what Cosworth calls sustained mode <--> usage so that you can run every lap like this.
The rev range of the V8 is from the Cockpit perspektive from Monza taken. So it should be accurate enough.
So it seems to me that the V8 and the V6 have about the same power level (until 5th Gear from last year). So I would say that the cars will be at least next year (and on some tracks this year) as fast as last year, especially in the Qualifications.

[SectorOne]

So I would say that the cars will be at least next year (and on some tracks this year) as fast as last year, especially in the Qualifications.

I guess we will find out. On what tracks this year do you think the cars will be as fast?

[rscsr]

So I would say that the cars will be at least next year (and on some tracks this year) as fast as last year, especially in the Qualifications.

I guess we will find out. On what tracks this year do you think the cars will be as fast?

Especially those tracks with a lot of accelerations to not so high top speeds.
On the top of my head I'd guess tracks like Monaco and Singapure. Maybe Canada.

[Sulman]

I think they'll claw back a lot of time relative to the Jerez test. They were mostly tentative, from the video footage I saw.

With regards to the balance, I think it's the right way to go. Around five years ago there were increasing noises that the V8's were far too driveable with regard to available downforce, and that as grip increased it was only going to get worse.

I'd like to see throttle use really mean something again.

Downforce? Some people (both of the technical and racing persuasion) have wanted it slashed for years. Well, it's finally happened. Yes, the cars are slower, but that's logical, no?

[beelsebob]

So when the lights go out they will be about 30kg´s heavier and about 100 horses down on average or something like that.

(still faster then a damn HRT)

What makes you think they'll be 100 horses down? More like 10 horses up.

They will have a maximum of 760 ish horses for 33s of the lap.
Last year you had a base 760 horses for 100% of the lap. On top of that you had 80hp for 5-6 seconds.

What makes you think they will be 10 horses up?
For about two thirds of the lap they will approximately run around with 600 horsepower minus the heat ers.

I think they'll be 10bhp up, because we already know that the Renault engine puts out 610bhp, and we think we know the Merc puts out more. Your 33 second figure is incorrect, they'll have it for pretty much all the acceleration on an entire lap, as they're not accelerating for a good chunk of the lap. Thus, for all intents and purposes, at every time that matters, they will have more power than they had last year.

[SectorOne]

I think they'll be 10bhp up, because we already know that the Renault engine puts out 610bhp, and we think we know the Merc puts out more. Your 33 second figure is incorrect, they'll have it for pretty much all the acceleration on an entire lap, as they're not accelerating for a good chunk of the lap. Thus, for all intents and purposes, at every time that matters, they will have more power than they had last year.

The 33s figure is not incorrect. Just like the KERS of 6.67s per lap is correct.

Even if you would actually have 760 horsepower all the time you are on throttle (which i find highly unlikely as you won´t be able to harvest enough energy per lap on every track) you are still 80 horsepower short at certain parts of the lap.
That´s almost a full 100 horsepower you are missing, it´s a massive chunk of performance.

A maximum of 760 horsepower approx versus a maximum of 840 approx.
The maximum of the V6 is the minimum of the V8.