This very engine could go Williams' way pretty soon Toto Wolff set to join Mercedes in senior management role - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com
Interesting. Anyone here besides me thinking that the Daimler board will force him to end his financial involvement with Williams before his Mercedes roll proceeds?
Ding!! Post of the year This year will be fun but 2014 is the next generation of F1. History to be made. Cant wait!!
Uhhh not even close. I never said F1 would die at all, but it would just become more dumbed down than it already is. Seriously, F1 could run N/A 4 cylinders and people would probably still watch...
If you could only predict F1 that well. Congrats. Disappointed but at least we won't have to endure two weeks of pre Super Bowl hype here yet again. I predict a Harbaugh win.
Why is this engine configuration considered "dumbed down"?. It is more complex and interesting than the N/A v8's that it is replacing and definitely has more hp potential. When F1 was last predominantly 4 cylinders, back in the 1.5 litre days (although other engine configurations did run later as well), we had the best and most competitive racing ever AND this period forced designers to move their focus to other areas of the car and advanced the technology in racing considerably. Conclusion: Change is good for motorsport, and I don't care if we end up running single cylinder engines as I am sure they will be most amazing things! Pete
This powertrain is hardly 'dumbed down'. It's undoubtedly the most complicated engine ever conceived in F1 as it's the first to heavily marry electric drive technology with its massive and immediate torque potential to combustion engines which are more fickle in controlling power bands, not to mention heat harvesting, turbo technology, gearbox innovations. This powertrain means a huge amount not only to F1, but to the automotive industry and energy generation industry. F1 will r&d a huge amount of useful information usable by several industries only making them better and more efficient.
Frozen engines are dumbed down. I also highly doubt that this engine, for all it's complexity, produces the same power numbers as even the weak V8 lumps today. It certainly won't be as consistent... Besides, you guys are taking my post out of context. The engines are really one of my minor complaints next to ugly ass cars, miles of concrete runoff, no testing, etc.
The new engines will certainly have more torque, substantially more, which is why traction control via controlling the electric harvesting and motors is being spoken of so much. Bhp is for show, torque wins races. That being said, bhp will be within 30-40bhp of current but we really won't notice it. I agree with your second point. But I have to say I am glad the safety is there these days.
+1 on the first part. AFAIK, you're the only person who's talking about 'em using it for TC. I just don't think Charlie's gonna let 'em do it. [Rightfully so IMO. I hated 'em burping & farting when it kicked in.....] Cheers, Ian
Indeed. I've kind of scanned it and it makes interesting reading. It's certainly technically possible. I just don't think Charlie's gonna allow it. But, I was wrong once..... Cheers, Ian
And yet you described it in your post #105 as: Which is described here: slippery slope - definition of slippery slope by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia. , as being: Slippery slope: n. "A tricky precarious situation, especially one that leads gradually but inexorably to disaster" From this We get: (disaster - definition of disaster by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia. ): Dis·as·ter (d-zstr, -ss-) n. 1. a. An occurrence causing widespread destruction and distress; a catastrophe. b. A grave misfortune. 2. (Informal) A total failure Along with: Disaster [dɪˈzɑːstə] n 1. an occurrence that causes great distress or destruction 2. a thing, project, etc., that fails or has been ruined That sounds like a Death Knell to Me!
interesting stuff, ERS system, motors, etc Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Seemed like you cherry picked from the definitions, but whatever: A "tricky or precarious situation?" Hell yeah if it keeps on going like it is. These new engines were supposed to bring in all these new manufacturers yet no one has stepped up to the plate and they will actually cost us one (Cosworth). Fans are complaining and Bernie is against them. The cars are going to be slower and will have to be FAR more reliable despite a plethora of new technology. This is all "tricky" and could be "precarious" if it's mishandled. Would you want LMP cars to be faster than F1? It's heading that was quickly at this rate...that would definitely be "precarious" for a sport that prides itself on being the fastest thing around a road course. Plus as for disaster, IMO it's all relative. In my opinion, if F1 went to N/A 4 bangers and had canopies over the drivers, that would be a disaster (for me). I'd stop watching FOR SURE. I can't speak for everyone else, but I suspect viewing would go way down. Nowhere did I say that F1 is on its death bed and for the record, again, I don't think these new engines are going to be the deather of the sport. Also, for the record, again, the engines are one of my minimal gripes compared to other things.
Just saw an article on the Renault 2014 engine, and along with this thread is just about making my head explode since I'm no expert on engines. one question though, if I understood the article correctly, the 2014 rules will limit the car to a 100litre tank? Does that mean they'll be re-fuelling again, or just having 1 hour races?
With less rpm's, no Frankenstein 'boost levels' along with a smaller displacement it is possible, I think?
You didn't! Whether this is your misunderstanding or yet another "poorly" written article is another debate.... There are no restrictions on tank size. FWIW, not now, and not in 2014. What they are restricting (from 2014) is maximum "fuel flow rate". Specifically; No refueling. Cheers, Ian
Fast ian, thanks for clearing that up, there was something about the way it was written that I sure didn't understand. This article on the Renault 2014 engine was in F1 magazine, with the exploded view Williams car on the cover.
If the FiA increased the amount of fuel they are currently allowed to run beyond 10,500rpm, these engines could make 80s levels of turbo power. Obviously they didn't want that hence the fuel flow caps, but there is some conjecture of port injection piggybacking to the direct injection under a certain guideline, but it sounds very illegal really :/ More fuel flow or pooling fuel somehow to maintain legal fuel flow limits but injecting more is also being kicked around, sounds illegal too. hmm
