What will come after the 2.4 V8?

[rjsa]

Hypocrisy has absolutely nothing to do with it
We all know that the energy used by F1 cars in the world scheme is negligable.
I have nothing against high performance ic engines, I have been involved with them for nearly half a century.
The reason for F1 to address the environmental issues and to develop towards electric traction is a very simple one.
Without doing so F1 will not survive.

IC engines, single seater, wings and open wheels. The former is to get irrelevant. The later ones are totally irrelevant from the start. And they didn't prevent F1 from becoming a huge success.

[WhiteBlue]

More efficient ways to produce energy do not demand immediate less use of energy during the show. Trying to be PC by saying 'we are burning less fuel during races' is as hypocrite as it gets.

I'm afraid that you have not understood what the commercial implications of auto racing have been in the past and will be in the future. For automotive manufacturers racing has always been a marketing tool. Just go back to 1959 and witness the dilemma of Ferrari having to change to rear engined cars for competition reasons while all their road cars had front engines. It was a big pain in the ass that Enzo could not avoid at all. Within a few years he launched the 246 Dino and all the famous Ferrari road cars until today's 468 Italia have been rear engined.

The combination of GP racing and marketing of road cars is so compelling that Ron Dennis is taking his high tech racing concern into the automotive manufacturer world now. For forty years the mighty McLaren brand was only used to sell cigarettes and booze for the highest bidder but today, no more. Ron even bites the hand that has fed him for almost two decades to exploit F1 racing and car manufacturing. He is splitting from his long term partners Mercedes in order to build the road cars he thinks are best in today's world. And big surprise they are performance cars with unmatched power to weight ratio in order to shine in the fuel consumption contest.

Performing best with ever decreasing fuel use is the holy grail of the automotive world today. Manufacturers are downsizing and stuffing the cars with efficiency technologies for decades and the race is heating up like mad. It would be absolutely stupid for F1 not to go for minimum fuel use of the race cars while keeping the traditional elements of it's DNA, being loud, fast, and exciting.

[747heavy]

autogyro,

With all due respect and why I understand and respect your opinion.
What makes you think F1 will not survive if not going to an electric powered drivetrain.
Ultimativly this is maybe true, but until at leat 50% of individual transport has switched to electic powered cars, this is unlikely to happen.
And that is a fair bit down the road.

On the other hand F1 is a far cry away from being seen as the peak of engineering achievments anyway, for at least the last 10 years, thanks to it´s rule book.
This is unlikely to change for the foreseeable future, but I don´t think that F1´s survival will depend on it.

It´s an show/entertainment business, not more not less, like any other sport.
And I don´t think that it needs any other justification, as that people want to see it, and are willing to spend money to see it. Not much different to football,soccer, tennis or whatever other sport you want to choose.

At present there are not that many people watching solar vehicle races, for one reason or the other, and I don´t think that any electric powered race series will pull in huge crowds at the moment.

You are maybe a bit ahead of the times here.
It´s a good thing, don´t get me wrong, but many things failed in the past, because the general public and/or the time was not ready/right for it.

You can go wrong by being too slow, but you can go equally wrong by being to fast/far ahead. - IMHO

[autogyro]

Hypocrisy has absolutely nothing to do with it
We all know that the energy used by F1 cars in the world scheme is negligable.
I have nothing against high performance ic engines, I have been involved with them for nearly half a century.
The reason for F1 to address the environmental issues and to develop towards electric traction is a very simple one.
Without doing so F1 will not survive.

IC engines, single seater, wings and open wheels. The former is to get irrelevant. The later ones are totally irrelevant from the start. And they didn't prevent F1 from becoming a huge success.

F1 became hugely successful because it was cleverly promoted as the absolute peak of high performance technology with the very best drivers.
It has not been at the peak of this technology for some decades now and only continues because the general public do not know the truth.
Aerodynamic downforce has been used as the selling point over this period. It has been a convenient way to trick the viewing public while F1 was turned into a basic controlled formula for the benefit of the motor manufacturers and oil companies.
The alternate energy revolution that is developing at an ever swifter rate beneath your nose and few have yet recognised, will slowly turn public support away from F1 if it remains as it is. There realy is no alternative.

[rjsa]

More efficient ways to produce energy do not demand immediate less use of energy during the show. Trying to be PC by saying 'we are burning less fuel during races' is as hypocrite as it gets.

I'm afraid that you have not understood what the commercial implications of auto racing have been in the past and will be in the future. For automotive manufacturers racing has always been a marketing tool. Just go back to 1959 and witness the dilemma of Ferrari having to change to rear engined cars for competition reasons while all their road cars had front engines. It was a big pain in the ass that Enzo could not avoid at all. Within a few years he launched the 246 Dino and all the famous Ferrari road cars until today's 468 Italia have been rear engined.

The combination of GP racing and marketing of road cars is so compelling that Ron Dennis is taking his high tech racing concern into the automotive manufacturer world now. For forty years the mighty McLaren brand was only used to sell cigarettes and booze for the highest bidder but today, no more. Ron even bites the hand that has fed him for almost two decades to exploit F1 racing and car manufacturing. He is splitting from his long term partners Mercedes in order to build the road cars he thinks are best in today's world. And big surprise they are performance cars with unmatched power to weight ratio in order to shine in the fuel consumption contest.

Performing best with ever decreasing fuel use is the holy grail of the automotive world today. Manufacturers are downsizing and stuffing the cars with efficiency technologies for decades and the race is heating up like mad. It would be absolutely stupid for F1 not to go for minimum fuel use of the race cars while keeping the traditional elements of it's DNA, being loud, fast, and exciting.

You are seeing too much into Ron's move. Ron split with Daimler or the way around we will never know. I'd say Daimler split with Ron after being associated with the spy gate and funding the 100 million fine.

On restricting fuel usage withou castrating the cars, I'm all for it.

[autogyro]

747 heavy
There is only one reason why there is not a rapidly developing world structure of electric motor sport as there already is with electric motor cycle racing.
It is because the FIA and other regulating bodies refuse at present to establish 'Official Electric Motor Sport Formula'.
They realise that this must happen and no part of the principle contained in my official paper presented to the FIA AEC in January this year on this subject has been in any way criticized.
The regulating body is delaying electric vehicle racing as long as it can for the benefit of the interests vested in the status quo.
Without official electric formula, electric racing will not attract teams and sponsors and it will not develop.
I have recently suggested to the FOTA and the FIA, that the teams originate an electric formula to run alongside F1 at all the venues. This would not only justify the green image that F1 wishes to embrace but would also bring the FOTA and the FIA closer together and ensure a sensible and cost effective future.

[rjsa]

747 heavy
There is only one reason why there is not a rapidly developing world structure of electric motor sport as there already is with electric motor cycle racing.
It is because the FIA and other regulating bodies refuse at present to establish 'Official Electric Motor Sport Formula'.
They realise that this must happen and no part of the principle contained in my official paper presented to the FIA AEC in January this year on this subject has been in any way criticized.
The regulating body is delaying electric vehicle racing as long as it can for the benefit of the interests vested in the status quo.
Without official electric formula, electric racing will not attract teams and sponsors and it will not develop.
I have recently suggested to the FOTA and the FIA, that the teams originate an electric formula to run alongside F1 at all the venues. This would not only justify the green image that F1 wishes to embrace but would also bring the FOTA and the FIA closer together and ensure a sensible and cost effective future.

You don't need FIA for that. FIA does not hold rights to car racing at all. It's plain lack of technology and interest.

[010010011010]

Ferrari having to change to rear engined cars for competition reasons while all their road cars had front engines. It was a big pain in the ass that Enzo could not avoid at all. Within a few years he launched the 246 Dino and all the famous Ferrari road cars until today's 468 Italia have been rear engined.

Most fearrai's are mid-engined not rear-engined, and they still make very good front engined cars too you know - the 599 gto being the pinacle of it at the moment

It may have escaped your attention that most developed countries have very ambitious targets with regard to electric vehicles. Germany for instance aims to have 10% of it's fleet of cars fully electric in nine years time.

Yes an in Ireland they hope to have 10% of cars being electric by 2020. That doesnt actually mean it will happen, like most things they promise.

Granted that a car run from a power station is more efficent, but alot less practical, and at the end of the day its 95% of the power is still coming from oil at the moment

All im saying is im not going waiting 20 min at the side of a motorway waiting for my disfunctional (and incredibly UNenvromentally friendly) battery to charge

[010010011010]

They realise that this must happen and no part of the principle contained in my official paper presented to the FIA AEC in January this year on this subject has been in any way criticized.

While your name dropping this paper again can i ask you to send me a copy? I sent you my email address a few weeks ago but got no reply, thanks

[autogyro]

The FIA regulates motor sport throughout most of this planet rjsa.
It already regulates the electric and hybrid vehicles that do compete on safety and established formula eligability.
Until the FIA establishes regulations for a range of pure electric formula there will not be a level playing field for electric vehicles to race on.
You are correct in one respect.
Most of the people building electric performance vehicles are doing so independently and are still stuck stumbling about trying to produce high performance electric road sports cars that are to expensive and irelevent for most purposes, instead of working together to put pressure on the regulating bodies for proper EV racing formula.
Until they are prepared to do so, electric vehicles both road and potential race, will not progress far on the world vehicle stage.
History proves that vehicle development always comes from competition.

[autogyro]

42
If you want a pdf of my paper then pm me.

Electric transport infra structures are potentialy far far more practical and efficient than internal combustion based on liquid fuel.
Most of the infra structure for electric systems was well on its way to completion in America and most of Europe in the mid to late 1930's.
This was all ripped down to make way for the oil era.
Converting to electric traction is the first step to allow centralised energy production and the far higher efficiency available from this.
Alternate energy use is another issue in the same future.

There is one huge difference between fossil fuels and batteries.
Fossil fuels are converted to extra and damaging CO2 in our atmosphere.
The rare elements used in batteries remain in the batteries available for recycling technology and release zero CO2.

[rjsa]

42
If you want a pdf of my paper then pm me.

Electric transport infra structures are potentialy far far more practical and efficient than internal combustion based on liquid fuel.
Most of the infra structure for electric systems was well on its way to completion in America and most of Europe in the mid to late 1930's.
This was all ripped down to make way for the oil era.
Converting to electric traction is the first step to allow centralised energy production and the far higher efficiency available from this.
Alternate energy use is another issue in the same future.

There is one huge difference between fossil fuels and batteries.
Fossil fuels are converted to extra and damaging CO2 in our atmosphere.
The rare elements used in batteries remain in the batteries available for recycling technology and release zero CO2.

You can call me a cynic, but racing does not improve technology. Wars do.


We will always search the path of least resistance, and burning oils is such a path. When the wars to secure oil fail, we will look for something else.

We are here today using the byproducts of the WWII and cold war. Jets and rockets. Miniature electronics and satellites. The internet itself is a war development. Turbo chargers and intercoolers. Even margarine and cereal bars.

On the subject of batteries, do you really think that racing will have a bigger effect on research than missiles, space drones and mobile comunications? I don't.

[autogyro]

Creating conflict and wars simply speeds the competition up.
All successful politicians realise this fact.
Perhaps the people are ready for a different way.

[WhiteBlue]

Most fearrai's are mid-engined not rear-engined, and they still make very good front engined cars too you know - the 599 gto being the pinacle of it at the moment.

You are splitting hairs. A mid engined car has the engine behind the driver as well. It is just an euphemism to distinguish from some under powered cars with bigger cabin and four seats.

If I would have to make a choice between a 458 Italia (0.54 hp/kg) and a 599 GTO (0.42 hp/kg) I would take the mid engined car with 29% better power to weight ratio and much better fuel economy.

Anyway, the issue here is the future of F1 engines and I for my part applaude the FiA and Jean Todt that they want to bring F1 back into the real world regarding engine trends.

[autogyro]

I completely agree WB.
i4 is the obvious way to go.