Hi awesome thread, hope I'm not too late to reply (only just found it).
Honda's 3l v10 engine produced about 950hp at 18500rpm in 2006
(source here:
http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/engi ... story.html)
I personally reckon a v10 would be better than a v12 especially in regards to the weight aspect you mentioned in your opening post (v10 engine would be lighter than v12 and less complex).
First and foremost, the power aspect of the cars wouldn't really be comparable to what they were running in the past. My main reason for this is the introduction of Direct Injection in the 2014 turbo v6 engines compared to multi port fuel previously.
The advantages of direct injection (over MPFI) in regards to power are huge.
Running DI on these new engines would yield more power due to the fact that DI doesn't spray fuel into the cylinder until the instant it needs it for the combustion cycle. This means you could run a higher compression ratio and not have to worry about engine knock. Higher compression ratio = bigger bang = more power (possibly a significant torque increase too due to the extra force the piston is being subjected to).
Mazda's new skyactiv technology (uses DI on petrol engines) and enables compression ratios of 13:1 (a huge thing to take note of with this is the engines aren't built from any exotic materials, have a large safety margin and large reliability margin for longevity). Take into account some Dirt bikes made by ktm and yamaha are pushing 14:1 + on their 250cc four strokes also using fairly ordinary materials (AND no pneumatic valves either) well...
It'd be pretty hard to gauge what these guys could come up with but with the DI compared to MPFI and beefed up comp. ratio. I'd say 16:1 would be a walk in the park for these guys, you'd probably be looking at a 10-16% power increase assuming the engines are revving the same. In regards to rpm I think 22000 rpm is the maximum these engines could rev to before they start being overcome by large amounts of friction (which would sap power). compared to the honda at the start that'd be another 10-13% power so all up you'd be looking at maybe 25% on top of that 950hp.
So about 1200 hp I reckon with a Specific output of 400hp/L for a N/A engine; pretty insane.
This is also assuming fuel hasn't change octane rating...
In terms of engine weight well steel crankshaft is the Achilles heel of lightweight engines in f1. Get rid of that and replace it with something a lot lighter and that 95kg engine will be down to about 85kg.
Lighter crankshaft would also have lower rotational inertia so more power to the wheels there.
For lightweight and durability though it's pretty hard to beat magnesium and there have been a lot of breakthroughs in making it corrosion resistant (through the use of stainless alloys and magnesium) and neutralizing it's spontaneous combustion properties (by adding silicon molecules I believe)
http://www.gizmag.com/stainless-magnesi ... ash/28856/
If it's possible to make an engine block out of stainless magnesium well the possibilities are endless. This would easily supersede steel, cast iron, aluminium, titanium and beryllium too (an illegal material in f1 atm). I reckon about 65kg overall so about 25kg lighter than the old engines.
