Horsepower of the engines.

[gruntguru]

..... the mgu-h in self sustaining mode. Increasing cylinder pressure doesn't always translate to more power at the crank, but it does mean more energy for the turbine to recover.......

didn't gg show that increasing cylinder pressure wouldn't increase recovery unless the turbine and compressor are over 80% efficient ?

That was charge pressure not cylinder pressure.

It does seem that peak cylinder pressures have increased significantly. Mercedes talk (vaguely) about four elephants on the piston which comes to about 400 bar. (unfortunately they didn't specify African/Indian, adult/juvenile or male/female). This is a product of high boost, high compression and rapid combustion. Ferrari have also hinted at rapid combustion and high peak cylinder pressure.

Godlameroso. Higher peak-cylinder-pressure does not translate to increased exhaust energy - in fact the opposite. Higher CR and rapid combustion both improve the energy extraction by the piston, leaving less energy in the exhaust. Increased MAP (boost) does however increase exhaust energy by:
1. Raising pressure throughout the cycle including EVO and
2. Increasing mass flow.

[ESPImperium]

Thermal efficiency of the Mercedes that ended last year was rated conservatively at 42% to the best of my knowledge and this year it started at 47% to conservative estimates. If these estimates are even a few percentage points down on the actual figure, its still one hell of a feat to get that figure. All technology that will eventually trickle down to the cars we drive on the street and something that FOM should be broadcasting/shouting to the world and not airing the dirty laundry in public as is the normal.

[Cold Fussion]

Thermal efficiency of the Mercedes that ended last year was rated conservatively at 42% to the best of my knowledge and this year it started at 47% to conservative estimates. If these estimates are even a few percentage points down on the actual figure, its still one hell of a feat to get that figure. All technology that will eventually trickle down to the cars we drive on the street and something that FOM should be broadcasting/shouting to the world and not airing the dirty laundry in public as is the normal.

So you're telling me that in the span of a few months the Mercedes engineers have managed to increase the engine TE by 12%? Perhaps one day you will make a post with substantiated claims.

[mrluke]

Thanks. I remember reading that article now.

No worries, I wouldn't put much trust on the author but the quotes are pretty good

[Tommy Cookers]

..... All technology that will eventually trickle down to the cars we drive on the street and something that FOM should be broadcasting/shouting to the world and not airing the dirty laundry in public as is the normal.

F1 PU technologies can usefully be split into 2 classes .....
class 1 predates 2014-5 F1 by many years and is established in street car production (it works at partial powers)
class 2 (exhaust recovery and superfuel) will not benefit road cars significantly (it falls away at partial powers)
aircraft engines of the 1950s used class 2 but of course always operated between 50% and 100% power

perhaps that's why the FIA & FOM are not shouting to the world
they having withdrawn some of these technologies from N/A F1

[toraabe]

http://www.formel1.de/news/news/2016-03 ... des-selbst

[Juzh]

google translate is awful. A quick recap?

[gandharva]

They are talking about increasing fuel flow for PUs that are still lacking power to gain 2% power at maximum. The suggestion was made from Mercedes to equal out the field. Jean Todt does not like it.

Personally I call it bullshit. Reason: Source -> Auto Bild

[dragosmp]

And y'all think/believe that F1 runs gas you can buy at your local pump.

I don't think anyone thought or believed that.

for the benefit of any recent converts to this site ? .....

from 1958 to 2013 F1 fuel was limited in Octane Number (notionally to the ON of best road fuel)
late in this period (because of the very high rpm) N/A F1 didn't use the max permitted ON anyway

now there is no (upper) ON limit
though, interestingly, there is a minimum ON limit of 75

A guy told me a story of the 2012 BCN testing and the relevant bit to this discussion was that due to a strike and resulting traffic jam the fuel trucks didn't get at the track for the 1st morning. As a result they just used SP95 with the advance tuned back a lot and did the aero runs as usual.
Today the V6 turbos would just knock themselves out of existence without the additives in the race "fuel"

So you're telling me that in the span of a few months the Mercedes engineers have managed to increase the engine TE by 12%? Perhaps one day you will make a post with substantiated claims.

Last year 42% for Mercedes is faar too conservative; if the number is true it could be about an average over the race including any non-sustainable modes you'd get like those used on turn entry/exit or pitlane

[PlatinumZealot]

All engines are close in power now claims Paddy Lowe.

http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/3377 ... 5-ferrari/

Not surprising, but power is not everything. Renault had good peak power in 2014 but at lower fuel flows they were nowhere close to Merc. The harvesting is also another differentiator between them.

[ferkan]

Is anyone on F1 Technical going to believe Honda and Renault are close to the other two. I guess Ferrari might be 10-15hp down, but the other two are definitely around 50hp. And that is not close in any way shape or form. Lowe with ulterior motive.

[giantfan10]

Is anyone on F1 Technical going to believe Honda and Renault are close to the other two. I guess Ferrari might be 10-15hp down, but the other two are definitely around 50hp. And that is not close in any way shape or form. Lowe with ulterior motive.

I honestly dont know why anyone puts any faith in anything that any F1 team says....they all spin information to suit their agenda. does anyone actually think that Mercedes finds 5 tenths in their final run in qualifying because of aerodynamics? Where did mercedes have an advantage in the bahrain gp? sectors 1 and 3 while ferrari matched them in sector 2.
hmmm i wonder which sector showcases aerodynamics and which 2 are flat out horsepower sectors :

[bhall II]

Like PZ said, power isn't everything. If you gave me a choice between an engine with 900bhp and terrible "driveability" and one with 850-875bhp and superb "driveability," I'd take the latter without hesitation. Red Bull and Renault collected a whole lot of hardware in the V8 era with relatively weak engines that were nonetheless excellent in every other regard, especially efficiency and "driveability."

It's entirely possible, if not probable, that all PUs are indeed very close in terms of peak power output. But, that doesn't mean they're all close when it comes to performance value. (That's why Mercedes tried to silence critics at one point with a proposal to allow the other manufacturers to work with a marginally higher fuel-flow rate: raw power is far from Mercedes' only advantage, and they know it.)

[Juzh]

Simply looking at the onboard recording you can see renault is nowhere on the straights (yes, still, in 2016) compared to mercedes, and 2016 ferrari PU is also behind.

[FoxHound]

Simply looking at the onboard recording you can see renault is nowhere on the straights (yes, still, in 2016) compared to mercedes, and 2016 ferrari PU is also behind.

Why does it always boil down to straight line performance with you, Juzh?

Straights were not a factor to Red Bull winning 4 titles on the trot between 2010-13. They were always lower than Mercedes during this time, and sometimes by more than 10km/h.
With ancient V8's.

If it were top speed being the achilles heel of a Renault powered package, DF needs to be dialled back.
The same as Mercedes powered cars having to run kg's more fuel to create DF on the EBD in the 10-13 era.

Besides... the Renault team proper manage to make some pretty decent top speed figures... nothing to do with the overall aerodynamic philosophy perhaps?