2014-2020 Formula One 1.6l V6 turbo engine formula

[ReoPTy]

Lewis' qualifying time today was the fastest time recorded since Mark Webber's pole in 2010. These cars lack the double diffusers of that era, they have markedly smaller wings and subsequently less downforce, and most importantly they are only allowed to use DRS in the DRS zones not in the entirety of the track as it used to be back then.

...all this while using 30% less fuel.

Respek.

Less downforce hence less drag. These cars are faster in acceleration and on the straights on a track like Spa you can make up that time on the straights.

1.3s to third place, F1 has become such mess ...

[shin]

In 2010 there was no DRS on cars.

[mrluke]

Lewis' qualifying time today was the fastest time recorded since Mark Webber's pole in 2010. These cars lack the double diffusers of that era, they have markedly smaller wings and subsequently less downforce, and most importantly they are only allowed to use DRS in the DRS zones not in the entirety of the track as it used to be back then.

...all this while using 30% less fuel.

Respek.

Less downforce hence less drag. These cars are faster in acceleration and on the straights on a track like Spa you can make up that time on the straights.

If it was that simple then all of the years since 2010 would have chosen to lose some downforce and therefore some drag if it made their laptimes that much faster.

Each year the cars are optimised to deliver the best laptimes. This year the cars are the fastest they have been since the most recent layout changes to spa. Whichever way you want to cut it that is quite impressive.

[Silent Storm]

I never said its simple but the lower drag helps in laptime in Spa.

[Moose]

I never said its simple but the lower drag helps in laptime in Spa.

Yes, but lower downforce hinders it.

Again, the point is that there's an optimal drag and downforce combination for Spa. Shifting away from that optimum in any year makes your lap time slower. In 2010, they certainly were not deliberately moving themselves away from the optimum.

If the optimum is indeed (as you suggest) to run very little downforce and drag, then they would have done that in 2010 (as the rules allowed a 2015 like car back then, if you wanted to run it). The teams did not move to an extremely low downforce and drag setup back then, so the only valid assumption is that the higher downforce and drag combination was in fact better, not worse.

Remember, the rules have got more restrictive, not less. (Pretty much) anything you can do today, you could also do back then.

With that in mind, the only logical conclusion is that the improved engines is the reason for the improved performance, given that both tires and aero have regressed.

[Silent Storm]

I agree with what you say but the 2010 car was different and it's optimum point was different compared to today's car.
In 2010 they could not run very low downforce to current car level as they also need some grip around the corners. Look at Force india and Lotus they are fastest in speed traps but not topping the timesheets, Mercedes can run Monaco spec here for more downforce which can be closer to 2010 low drag but they would not top the timesheet.

So you see the optimum downforce drag ratio has also changed with the cars. And I have said it before that the acceleration these engines provide has also helped for the quicker times.
I did not mean that if we keep lowering the downforce the times will improve but if new regs reduce downforce by another 20% expect the times at spa or monza to improve but as I said the optimum downforce drag ratio will change again.

[Moose]

I agree with what you say but the 2010 car was different and it's optimum point was different compared to today's car.
In 2010 they could not run very low downforce to current car level as they also need some grip around the corners.

Right - and what makes you think that they don't need grip around corners in 2015?

[Silent Storm]

I agree with what you say but the 2010 car was different and it's optimum point was different compared to today's car.
In 2010 they could not run very low downforce to current car level as they also need some grip around the corners.

Right - and what makes you think that they don't need grip around corners in 2015?

Like I said if they run Monaco level downforce at spa or monza they would have good grip around and traction out of corners but it still won't top the timesheets. The downforce drag ratio is different for 2015 cars compared to 2010, you need grip around the corners but top speed too look at red bull for example. Hence the 2015 cars also require different driving style compared to earlier cars.

[Moose]

I agree with what you say but the 2010 car was different and it's optimum point was different compared to today's car.
In 2010 they could not run very low downforce to current car level as they also need some grip around the corners.

Right - and what makes you think that they don't need grip around corners in 2015?

Like I said if they run Monaco level downforce at spa or monza they would have good grip around and traction out of corners but it still won't top the timesheets. The downforce drag ratio is different for 2015 cars compared to 2010, you need grip around the corners but top speed too look at red bull for example. Hence the 2015 cars also require different driving style compared to earlier cars.

So what you're saying is effectively the same as me then. The 2015 cars suffer a significant downforce loss, and as a result need to make up for that on the straights and in the low speed mechanical grip corners. They have been forced (by the regulations) away from a better downforce to drag ratio, and towards a worse one. To make up for that, their engines need to be more powerful.

Remember, again, while the 2015 cars can't run the downforce and drag levels of the 2010 cars, it absolutely *was* an option for the 2010 cars to run both the downforce and drag levels of a 2015 car. They didn't do that - because it wasn't the optimum, that is, the aero package of a 2010 car was better overall, the engine was worse.

[hollus]

Just to remind you that these 2015 cars are much heavier than 2010 cars. A heavier car will corner (and brake and accelerate) slower given equivalent downforce, but it will have the same top speed given equivalent drag. Maybe that's what moved the optimum downforce to drag ratio to a point which just suits 2015 rules, at Spa.

[Cold Fussion]

Another thing to consider is that the Pirelli tyres are likely a little bit faster over a single lap compared to the bridgestone tyres. The 2011 cars were at times faster than the 2010 cars (at varying times throughout the year) despite the loss of the double diffusers.

[Juzh]

Another thing to consider is that the Pirelli tyres are likely a little bit faster over a single lap compared to the bridgestone tyres. The 2011 cars were at times faster than the 2010 cars (at varying times throughout the year) despite the loss of the double diffusers.

Rare circumstances.

[AxialTurbine]

For diesels you simply control the fuel. You don't throttle. Your turbine/compressor energy would more vary with the temperature after combustion than mass flow of air.

Compressor or turbine work is proportional to temperature and mass flow. If you vary mass flow by 10% compressor work will go up by 10% and the same if you increased temperature by 10%

Work = m.Cp.(Tin-Tout)

But you know that already.

[SectorOne]

I agree with what you say but the 2010 car was different and it's optimum point was different compared to today's car.
In 2010 they could not run very low downforce to current car level as they also need some grip around the corners.

Right - and what makes you think that they don't need grip around corners in 2015?

Anyone have sector 2 data from Webber and Hamiltons laps?

[OO7]

I think it is worth noting that many of the cars were using the 'F-duct' device in Spa. Having said that, top speeds in Q were 25 to 30kph down compared to Spa 2015 Q speeds.