What will come after the 2.4 V8?

[pitlaneimmigrant]

That's how I think the whole formula should be! (Except for the diesel bit)

You can have this much fuel, everything else is open. If the manufacturers want to see a technological show piece which will develop technology they can transfer to road vehicles that's how to do it. And we get to see some interesting things going on the cars. Everyone wins!
Except maybe Bernie and Max but do I look worried

[Scania]

1.5L L4 Turbo
or
750cc Twin Rotary Turbo
E85 or B85 Fuel
Direct fuel injection
Unlimited KERS & HERS but no pre-store before warm up lap
CVT allowded
no VVT, but sevor direct contral valve
Hybrid or full alternative energy car allowded (e.g. electric)
cost cap

[Dukeage]

CVTs wouldn't sound good, and they wouldn't exactly do much as far as driver skill is concerned.

[ISLAMATRON]

CVTs wouldn't sound good, and they wouldn't exactly do much as far as driver skill is concerned.

We are discussing sensable not emotional, but then again sensable must take into account the fans' feelings towards the on track product.

With no TC, moveable aero and KERS, the drivers have more to do now than just a couple years ago, so leaving the "shifting" to the CVT wouldnt make them any less busy then say 2 years ago.

[pitlaneimmigrant]

I do concede though that CVT's would sound really lame. It would be like listening to a giant Scalectrix set.

But, they would meet the challenge of providing a challenge to the F1 teams as well as letting the manufacturers develop systems with genuine cross over potential.

[riff_raff]

I agree with jddh1. Big displacement, normally aspirated V12's. Screw the feel good, self-righteous, hypocritical, nanny-state socialists. This F1 racing! It's all about cars that have outrageous amounts of power, that can stop on a dime, make lots of lovely ear-splitting noise, and which driver has the biggest b@lls.

It's a sad state of affairs when F1 racing is mostly concerned about being environmentally "sensitive". Pussies! This cr@p would never happen in NASCAR or NHRA.

[ISLAMATRON]

I'll give you a 5L V-12 N/A and I'll take a 2L V-6 turbo with unlimited boost... would you be stupid enuff to bet all your assets against who can make more power? And be lighter at the same time? And use less fuel?

[xpensive]

Said this a few time before.

I think a 2.6l methanol-burning Turbo-V8 is the way to go. An already existing concept, sensible size, easy to tweak to anywhere between 500 and 1000 Hp and a "Green" image with fuel made from cellulose.

[mikaela]

2.0 4 cilindros no turbo o 1.4 turbo 4 cilindros

[Ian P.]

The reason we wound up with 2.4 L V8s was because the 3L cars were getting too powerful and too fast. The last I heard was that the Honda 3L was touching 1000 BHP.
Back in the height of the Turbo era, BMW had a production based 1500 cc 4 cylinder engine putting out close to 1300 BHP in qualifying trim. With current materials and development I suspect a 1500 cc Turbo could easily get to 1500 BHP. Consider it a gas-turbine with a reciprocating power take-off section.
Conclusion, unrestricted turbos are not going to work. Too powerful and not transferrable technology to (green) road-cars. Then again 2.4 L V8s at 18,000 rpm aren't too useful for a jaunt down to the pub either.
Whatever engine formula is selected, it will be heavily regulated and include standard power limiting components such as Boost-Control valves or intake flow restrictors. Unfortunate but inevitable.

[elmerfud]

Boxer, 1.2 litre, twin turbo, boost limit to 750hp.
Unlimited revs to entice technology again.

[djos]

1.8ltr Twin Turbo V6's (just lop of 2 cylinders from the current engine spec and add turbos).

[hecti]

i love v-10's and turbo's so id have to say:
1.5 litre twin turbo v10s
unlimited power and rpms
2 per weekend(one for practice and then pumped up for quali, and then one for the race)

or 1.5L I-4 turbo(like in the old school days)

[Scania]

2 per weekend(one for practice and then pumped up for quali, and then one for the race)

I don't think no one want this under financial crisis.....
& a super short life engine have no value for technical developed

[Dukeage]

i love v-10's and turbo's so id have to say:
1.5 litre twin turbo v10s
unlimited power and rpms
2 per weekend(one for practice and then pumped up for quali, and then one for the race)
or 1.5L I-4 turbo(like in the old school days)

Too much power there, and 1.5 V10s would be extremely fiddly. Two engines per weekend are neither cost viable or road relevant. A new set of engine rules should be able to last six races IMO.

Whatever engine formula is selected, it will be heavily regulated and include standard power limiting components such as Boost-Control valves or intake flow restrictors. Unfortunate but inevitable.

Wouldn't an easier way to restrict the power would be requiring that the ECU has the same settings and runs open source software, coupled with a standard data logger and telementary system. Run the car on a rolling road, measure the power at the wheels whilst noting the revs, turbo pressure and whatnot. If they go above the limit, log it (small oddities happen with the rev limits now) and if they exceed it a lot chuck 'em out. Everyone has a 750hp engine - the engine guys should be building the engine for fuel economy (bonus points!) for the big teams, and the privateers can have cheaper engines. Or both with a cost cap per engine.