Last 10 years most of major auto racing tournaments are abandoning naturally-aspirated engines in favour of turbocharger

[theriusDR3]

The rise of turbocharged engines has come to the attention of motorsport fans since 2010 when GP3 Series sported a turbocharged engine until 2012, in 2013 GP3 Series ditched turbo engines for naturally-aspirated. Turbocharged engines are usually for increasing engine power and speed.

In 2012 turbocharged engines returned to IndyCar Series after 15 years sported with NA engines and later in 2014 IndyCar Series mandates the twin-turbo powerplants.

In 2014 the turbocharged engines rise again by returning to Formula One since 1988 season after many years of the sport utilized the NA engines. But the turbocharged engines were joined by hybrid components. A year later Indy Lights introduced turbocharged engines despite second-tier of American Open Wheel Racing.

Recently in 2018 and 2019 turbocharged expand again to FIA Formula 2 Championship and German Touring Car Masters (DTM) respectively.

I'm a fan of turbocharged engines but turbos are good for motorsports and also for fuel efficiency. Classical V8 NA engines are dying due to moving on to turbos and considered outdated.

Only V8 Supercars and all NASCAR series still retaining the traditional V8 naturally-aspirated engines despite have lived longer.

Your opinions?

Sent from my vivo 1716 using Tapatalk

[Tommy Cookers]

....In 2014 the turbocharged engines rise again by returning to Formula One since 1988 season after many years of the sport utilized the NA engines. But the turbocharged engines were joined by hybrid components. ....
..... turbos are good .... for fuel efficiency.

the F1 engines are not turbocharged - they are turbocompounded (and this is possible with NA)

and ...
the superior efficiency of turbocharging depends on having cylinder CR matching the NA engine's
DI actively adjusting fuel rate during combustion enables this eg in F1
fuel composition favourable to turbocharging does or has done this in other categories
though unusually intense charge cooling might suffice if required

[NL_Fer]

They should replace Porsche Supercup in F1 weekends with NA Ferrari’s. At least the spectators would havr something to listen to.

[914hald]

They should replace Porsche Supercup in F1 weekends with NA Ferrari’s. At least the spectators would havr something to listen to.

Just update them to 2018 RSR's, what an amazing sounding modern racecar

[Edax]

The rise of turbocharged engines has come to the attention of motorsport fans since 2010 when GP3 Series sported a turbocharged engine until 2012, in 2013 GP3 Series ditched turbo engines for naturally-aspirated. Turbocharged engines are usually for increasing engine power and speed.

In 2012 turbocharged engines returned to IndyCar Series after 15 years sported with NA engines and later in 2014 IndyCar Series mandates the twin-turbo powerplants.

In 2014 the turbocharged engines rise again by returning to Formula One since 1988 season after many years of the sport utilized the NA engines. But the turbocharged engines were joined by hybrid components. A year later Indy Lights introduced turbocharged engines despite second-tier of American Open Wheel Racing.

Recently in 2018 and 2019 turbocharged expand again to FIA Formula 2 Championship and German Touring Car Masters (DTM) respectively.

I'm a fan of turbocharged engines but turbos are good for motorsports and also for fuel efficiency. Classical V8 NA engines are dying due to moving on to turbos and considered outdated.

Only V8 Supercars and all NASCAR series still retaining the traditional V8 naturally-aspirated engines despite have lived longer.

Your opinions?

Sent from my vivo 1716 using Tapatalk

It is about bloody time

Might be age showing but for me Turbo’s (capital T) were exiting technology (F1, group B). Despite the efforts of the FIA to level the playing field year after year the Turbo’s kept winning and the margin kept increasing. It was like the propellor era trying to compete with turbine planes.

I never to this day understood the decision of the FIA to ban them in 89. It felt like going back to cigar chassis, leaf-spring suspension and spoke wheels.

With tens if thousands of fans burning tons of kerosene flying to races, the fuel consumption of a racing engine is a bit of a silly story if you ask me, more power in an affordable lighter package should be argument enough to be embraced by any racing series which pretends to be somewhere at the forefront of performance.

And the sound. I guess it is personal, but I like it.

[MatsNorway]

Personally i do not get why racecars would go turbo unless they actually aim to be as fast as possible. Even the GT3 cars needs to run restrictors on their NA engines.

Which is basically only true for time attack cars and unlimited hill climb cars.. Adding or chancing parts is adding cost.

[Jolle]

Personally i do not get why racecars would go turbo unless they actually aim to be as fast as possible. Even the GT3 cars needs to run restrictors on their NA engines.

Which is basically only true for time attack cars and unlimited hill climb cars.. Adding or chancing parts is adding cost.

Isn’t GT3 run with production engines and a balance of performance?

For other uses, a low reviving 4 cilinder with a turbo is cheaper then a high reviving V8 with the same power. Plus because of the lower revs, they last longer.

[MatsNorway]

Isn’t GT3 run with production engines and a balance of performance?

For other uses, a low reviving 4 cilinder with a turbo is cheaper then a high reviving V8 with the same power. Plus because of the lower revs, they last longer.

They are usually running production engines yes, and BOP it is. And i do not watch it because of BOP. Anyway. Point is that in a touring car pushing 300hp you should have gone air restricted NA instead of turbo engine. This is not ground breaking performance. And they will push the tech wherever they can so more money will be spent. And.. it lowers the entry bar for amateurs when simpler tech is used. NA engines is more viewer friendly as well. I doubt the majority of amatur series is turbo based.

But you do have a point when the desired power to weight ratio goes up.

If you want cheap spec racing you can not go cheaper than NA V8 ala. LS engines. It would also make cheats harder and tech inspection easier..

[Jolle]

Isn’t GT3 run with production engines and a balance of performance?

For other uses, a low reviving 4 cilinder with a turbo is cheaper then a high reviving V8 with the same power. Plus because of the lower revs, they last longer.

They are usually running production engines yes, and BOP it is. And i do not watch it because of BOP. Anyway. Point is that in a touring car pushing 300hp you should have gone air restricted NA instead of turbo engine. This is not ground breaking performance. And they will push the tech wherever they can so more money will be spent. And.. it lowers the entry bar for amateurs when simpler tech is used. NA engines is more viewer friendly as well. I doubt the majority of amatur series is turbo based.

But you do have a point when the desired power to weight ratio goes up.

If you want cheap spec racing you can not go cheaper than NA V8 ala. LS engines. It would also make cheats harder and tech inspection easier..

I even think most of the cars in the GT3 are or soon will be turbo powered (McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes have all turbo powered cars).

At amateur events, most cars are quite old, but as time goes on, most cars come with turbo power. All of the hot hatches have tiny turbo engines these days, some still even from the group B days.

And a LS... come on, that’s 1930’s tech, can’t put that in a Ford Fiesta or a F3 car, it ain’t nascar.

Putting in a N.A. engine was never the easy choice, since the late seventies every racing series that allowed turbo charging, switched to turbos. That your preference is N.A. is something different and I agree that the technical challenges to get the most out of a N.A. is superieur than just turn up the boost but this is also what it makes so expensive.

Let’s say, you want a racing series with 400 hp. Now you can just fit a ecoboost Ford Cosworth with a turbo and you can race a whole season without rebuilding.

[MatsNorway]

An LS might be "old tech" for you. But an LS7 still weights less than a GTR engine for nearly double the capacity.

My point was that most series are not going all out speed like F1. So a spec engine makes sense for most amateur series. A crate engine like the LS can be dumped in for nearly no money at all. It is not everyone's taste ofc. but a 400hp factory V8 at 5-6L is so under stressed it could with minimal modification and regular maintenance probably go several seasons without trouble.
Cheap and slow is not always related.

How cheap can you get the Ford Ecoboost engines? say 400hp as you mentioned. Could be cheap too.

But if you want amateurs to race you gotta let them run carburetors and NA. If i ever race it will not be with a turbo engine first. I am not that crafty with engines. And luckily the local racing series is aware so there is plenty to join now and in the future. Be it Nostalgia, time attack or brand specific series. Street legal, NA or turbo. You get what you want.

[Jolle]

An LS might be "old tech" for you. But an LS7 still weights less than a GTR engine for nearly double the capacity.

My point was that most series are not going all out speed like F1. So a spec engine makes sense for most amateur series. A crate engine like the LS can be dumped in for nearly no money at all. It is not everyone's taste ofc. but a 400hp factory V8 at 5-6L is so under stressed it could with minimal modification and regular maintenance probably go several seasons without trouble.
Cheap and slow is not always related.

How cheap can you get the Ford Ecoboost engines? say 400hp as you mentioned. Could be cheap too.

But if you want amateurs to race you gotta let them run carburetors and NA. If i ever race it will not be with a turbo engine first. I am not that crafty with engines. And luckily the local racing series is aware so there is plenty to join now and in the future. Be it Nostalgia, time attack or brand specific series. Street legal, NA or turbo. You get what you want.

pushrod engines is for everybody old tech. no serious racing engine manufacturer makes them, no team is using them, except when the rules state so (nascar and sportscar racing where you need to use the production engine of the model you're using). Yes a LS is a cheap engine and one of the few that is sold in crates, fun to play with in your hotrod or home build monster, but when it comes to racing, everybody goes for something more modern, like a Subaru flat four with a turbo or any kind of 4 inline with a turbo.

or.. why not go of a two stroke? even smaller and lighter then a LS, or even a flathead.

[MatsNorway]

Same displacement two strokes would have destroyed the field in MotoGP and be lighter in the process. It is only when you add fuel limitations it gets interesting.


General statement:
Adding or chancing parts adds complexity which can add cost. Which is not needed when you already have a a low target performance for the class.

F1 is the pinnacle of complexity and therefore you have teams struggling to survive and a bunch of pay drivers.

[Jolle]

Same displacement two strokes would have destroyed the field in MotoGP and be lighter in the process. It is only when you add fuel limitations it gets interesting.


General statement:
Adding or chancing parts adds complexity which can add cost. Which is not needed when you already have a a low target performance for the class.

F1 is the pinnacle of complexity and therefore you have teams struggling to survive and a bunch of pay drivers.

What has the complexity from formula one compared to indycar to do with turbo charged engines? both have turbo (like) engines by the way...

if you would think that NA engines are cheaper, why does every spec series (at least in Europe) have or are switching to turbo power?

[MatsNorway]

I think it is a mistake to go turbo on everything. Having turbo in F1 is fine and same for indy. Those are high end racing series.

[ENGINE TUNER]

I think it is a mistake to go turbo on everything. Having turbo in F1 is fine and same for indy. Those are high end racing series.

Nonsense, it is more difficult and expensive to make more power with a high revving n/a engine rather than a low revving turbo engine which will inherently last longer. Turbo deletes the need for variable valve timing, variable intake length, etc, etc. Turbo gives a wider powerband and allows for less pistons. Turbo is superior for almost all racing series. That you are suggesting pushrod engines with carburetion shows that you are at least 30 years behind was in normal road tech.