+1 oh yeah, I'm looking forward to it. Biggest shake up in a long time, and the cars are going to be about as quick as the start or some time during the V10 era would you say? I have no problem with that. Looking forward to Mercedes and Ferrari destroying the field.
Yeah. For me it's a double edged sword. I think the racing will be interesting with no TC and much more torque/turbo power, yet I'm discouraged that they will have to save fuel.
It bunches the field up (like restrictor plates in Nascar), but is close always "better?" Many think so, I disagree. The racing was amazing from 1997-2000 and 2005-2008 and only two teams were always dominating at the top. That is OK by me.
I still get irritated that Ferrari have their people in the Scuderia making all these public declarations about the car and this and that. Shut up and make ****ing car that wins. Furthermore they need to shut up about any technical discoveries they've made. It may not be critical information they've announced though it just seems like a bad practice.
I hear the Ferrari front suspenion will no longer be pull rod. Ferrari zurück auf Pushrod: Ferrari mit neuer Aufhängung vorne - AUTO MOTOR UND SPORT it's said the car will be shown between January 23-25.
This is good news, but if we look closely, this would mean that the fast circuits such as Silverstone, SPA, Monza and Suzuka, the drivers won't be flat out since the higher speeds will demand more fuel compsumption. They'll have to manage that more. On the other hand, in the "slow" ones they will be able to push and forget about the fuel compsumption. I'm just wondering why this? Okay, they should be able to dictate the maximum fuel flow, I get that, but then increase the fuel tank so that it doesn't become a factor. It'll become like Cart in where they manage it and depending on attrition/safety cars, one can save fuel until the end while the others have to do quick fuel stops. The difference is that there is no refueling here. So I'm not sold on this one concept.
I thought that might be it but didn't want to assume. There's little doubt that the new specs will result in cars that will be tougher to drive. But if everyone has to dial it back to save gas the best won't get to shine.
Exactly! How about 25 kilos more so they can race. We have all the elements in place for an interesting/unpredictable season, and now fuel savings is potentially inherent strategy. We shall see.
Fuel strategy has often been an integral part of F1 racing; it was only China 2013 where we had Hamilton slowing down to save fuel and Rosberg being "ordered" to stay behind when he had more fuel and could have run at a faster pace. Don't you guys remember any of the similar occurrences over the past 3 years? The F1 regs for the recent no-refueling period allowed enough fuel for teams to be able to run flat-out for the entire distance of most of the races, yet the teams never chose to fuel the cars with that much fuel; they ALWAYS loaded less fuel and relied on traffic periods, safety cars, and strategy (driver saving fuel) to reach the end of the race, because they figured it was faster overall than carrying an extra 10, 20 kg of fuel. Go back to the previous turbo era in the 80s, and for the last 5 years they were fuel restricted, and the maximum allowed was reduced each of the last few years. In 1988, following another capacity decrease, Honda dominated with McLaren - someone suggested that fuel capacity restrictions would mean "It bunches the field up (like restrictor plates in Nascar)" - yet in 1988 with fuel restrictions, the field was not bunched up. Fuel capacity restricted or not restricted won't make any difference for 2014, since all the teams deliberately chose to run restricted capacity (ie where the car didn't carry enough fuel to run flat out for the race distance) for the last few no-refueling years anyway; and since in previous eras where no refueling capacity limits were in place there was plenty of exciting racing.
There's a big difference between setting your own fuel strategy and having one imposed on you. In the past teams could chose to run light if they felt it offered them an edge over teams that didn't. Now that they all are restricted there is no strategic advantage available. Just the need for everyone to runner slower than need be. Pinnacle of a Motor Sport my patookis.
The advantage here is in efficiency, not quantity. If a team's kinetic and heat energy recovery systems are 31% efficient (purely random number chosen for example purposes only), and another team's systems are 33% efficient, then the more efficient team gets a 2% advantage in strategic use of fuel vs. ERS. That's huge, and somewhat unrelated to the mandated total quantity of fuel (energy) available. Further, the strategic relative use of ERS vs. mechanical energy (fuel) will be key to overall pace. I think it's going to be fascinating.
No particular reason, beyond that I'm a mechanical engineer and I don't expect that the engineering teams will arrive at identical solutions for the incredibly complex issues for the new kinetic and heat energy recovery systems, any more than they arrived at identical solutions to the V8 engines power vs. efficiency solutions. The homologated V8 engines were maybe within 2% on fuel consumption and power output, but there was still a variance. With the heat recovery systems from the turbos, and the kinetic recovery systems, the mechanical systems and control systems, I'm quite certain that there will be greater than 2% difference in various parts of the systems, and that will lead to strategic advantages or capabilities. Again, I think it's going to be fascinating.
Here's an article that explains some of the power unit regulations and opportunities: 2014 regulations: F1's engine revolution - F1technical.net Note that the MGU-H (turbo heat and energy recovery) has unlimited energy transfer rates - there will be different solutions here that will provide the ones who guess right with efficiency advantages, which means power advantages. Engineering challenges of the highest order - exactly what F1 is supposed to offer!
In pursuit of speed. Not gas mileage. The tech is fascinating and it's what makes F1 unique. But it's not only what makes F1.
+1 Like at Le Mans?... Of course, they go even further with the BOP nonsense... Anyway, I find it interesting that Allison (among others) is saying that some races they'll have plenty of gas. Others may be a little dodgy. They're all ~200 miles these days, and OK, you're gonna use more at Silverstone than Monaco for example, but it's *that* tight? Get yer MGU's right and you have a big advantage it seems. As Phil noted, fascinating stuff! [Edit, sorry, Gordonc!] Cheers, Ian
