At the most recent meeting of the engine working group last Tuesday it emerged that constructors are looking for an engine formula that will provide simpler and lighter engines, following a considerable weight increase since the introduction of the Hybrid power units in 2014.
I just saw the comment you were replying to - he was talking about the Koenigsegg turbo valve.
Wow thanks, this is new product from them, i dont know this is exist before. So basically twin scroll turbo with variable valve between one and other scroll to reduce back pressure utilizing 3D print technique on steel. It should be more reliable than variable vane because fewer moving parts inside the turbine. Yes i agree this could reduce lag, however in expense of reliability and turbine aerodinamics. I prefer use old big turbine with greater efficiency and fill torque using MGUK
Budgets are one reason. Most companies that are big enough to have the spare cash to compete plan for this kind of ongoing expenditure years in advance. Very few companies are going to commit late to a $150+ million/year project.FW17 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 15:38I do not understand why the engine formula for 2021 is being closed out now, with the dead line set as May 2018
What is the point of giving manufacturers close to 2.5 years? This is just too much of a commitment for manufacturers.
Ideally it should be done in December 2019 so that they have just 12 months and manufacturers who are committing late are not disadvantaged.
I posted about this engine last yearCriXus wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 16:2960% Efficiency ICE without Hybrid System
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCr6bjQMrgU
glad he made a video about it. It is too much of a head start to current manufacturers.tcooper27 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 17:52Budgets are one reason. Most companies that are big enough to have the spare cash to compete plan for this kind of ongoing expenditure years in advance. Very few companies are going to commit late to a $150+ million/year project.FW17 wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 15:38I do not understand why the engine formula for 2021 is being closed out now, with the dead line set as May 2018
What is the point of giving manufacturers close to 2.5 years? This is just too much of a commitment for manufacturers.
Ideally it should be done in December 2019 so that they have just 12 months and manufacturers who are committing late are not disadvantaged.
I do not understand why no one is mentioning some kind of push to pass. Let's say from these 200kw in the race you have 150kw + 50kw available for some time.godlameroso wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 19:06We still don't know the details about the engine. Even if it's a turbo V6 I still think the engine block, and rods should be standardized, let the manufacturers figure out the heads crank and pistons, and the lower block. Standardize the cam phasing mechanism and allow variable timing,but no variable lift profiles. Variable geometry turbo and exhaust. Standardized pneumatic valve system. This along with chopping the MGU-H should make the engines substantially cheaper, but still allow the manufacturers to put their own take on the concept. The engine should make roughly ~730hp or like the old V8 engines, the hybrid system should be good for 200+kw. Deployment and recovery should be controlled by the driver, the rate of both deployment and recovery should be variable.
One way would be to have two wheel mounted triggers which deploy through the front wheels. Or a push to pass with different settings, and a BBW which harvests at the rate the driver selects if the plan is to keep it RWD.
Well seeing as how the next gen formula E cars have 200kW race motors, F1 should also have 200kW KERS units. So I agree if the push to pass is 250kWCriXus wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 20:03I do not understand why no one is mentioning some kind of push to pass. Let's say from these 200kw in the race you have 150kw + 50kw available for some time.godlameroso wrote: ↑23 Apr 2018, 19:06We still don't know the details about the engine. Even if it's a turbo V6 I still think the engine block, and rods should be standardized, let the manufacturers figure out the heads crank and pistons, and the lower block. Standardize the cam phasing mechanism and allow variable timing,but no variable lift profiles. Variable geometry turbo and exhaust. Standardized pneumatic valve system. This along with chopping the MGU-H should make the engines substantially cheaper, but still allow the manufacturers to put their own take on the concept. The engine should make roughly ~730hp or like the old V8 engines, the hybrid system should be good for 200+kw. Deployment and recovery should be controlled by the driver, the rate of both deployment and recovery should be variable.
One way would be to have two wheel mounted triggers which deploy through the front wheels. Or a push to pass with different settings, and a BBW which harvests at the rate the driver selects if the plan is to keep it RWD.
Remove down force so they have to use the brakes more?
