I can't believe that the V8s are more expensive to run than the latest V6s with all these electronic units etc etc.. They have to do something for sport's own good...
The current Hybrids are making just over the V10s power and doing it with 2/3rds the gas. In the end, this will be GOOD for the supercar industry--whether we want it or not--just like F1 transmissions.
After experiencing the sounds and spectacle of Kimi and Sebastian trashing the track record at Daytona a few months ago, there's only one thing to do: BRING BACK THE 12s! Gas is cheap again and what's a few more parts to these guys? The fans would LOVE IT!
With all due respect Mitch, there are supercars that still offer manual tranny's.....for the fun factor. Personally, I would like that option on the engine department as well....lets say a LaFerrari with NA V-12....which their special works department can do....it should be an option for those affluent enough that can afford these supercars or hypercars in general. I would'nt get caught up in this new Hybrid tech just yet.....yes its moving forward....but a battery is a battery...it stores energy for a limited amount of time and then to dispose of it in years....at least the combustion component of the hybrid unit still works. Once they mass produce it, it will take a tech with a master degree in mech. engineering, electrical engineering and automotive engineering....labor costs will be through the roof. This tech is due to European Gov'ts cutting emissions drastically and phasing out the NA/ATMO/ICE engine in that sector of the world. Here in the states, we are in Muscle Car era 2.0 and its never been more alive than back in the late 60's and early 70's. Don't get me wrong, Porsche and others are alive and well here. One more thing: noise pollution is another issue in the Euro sector. Here in the states, its not as bad in you can buy a Harley and get straight pipes which can be heard for a mile or more.....and then when you have 50 to 100 of them rolling by the city or suburbia....it must piss off those people living in those quiet neighborhoods. Same with the muscle car, supercar and hopefully the hypercar with aftermarket exhaust systems.
Just like the fans, the drivers want NA engines! see:50 [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izDbevriy6Q[/ame] While this year’s pole position time was 1.7 seconds faster than it was 12 months ago, the fastest lap of the race was 2.6 seconds quicker than we saw in 2016. However Kimi Raikkonen’s time of 1’26.538, set on the race’s penultimate lap, remains 2.4s off the race lap record set in 2004. 2017 Australian Grand Prix lap times and fastest laps · F1 Fanatic Bring back the V10's!
Right, its a worse power unit, so why go back? Just for the sound? That's stupid. If they still had v8s, who would be in f1? Ferrari, maybe Renault and cosworth? I prefer the mix we have now and the overall better power unit that makes 200hp more from vastly less fuel.
So why not go to the other extreme then and run battery cars? Since using less fuel seems of most importance to you. Or how about, a more sane suggestion, let the cars drive on hydrogen. Any fuel they'll use will all be water out of the exhausts anyways so the amount they use is almost irrelevant. To answer your question if we went back to ''ancient engines'' and who would still be in F1...well that'll be Ferrari definitely, Cosworth can build engines and presumably Renault. They're not stupid, as long as they can make money with it they'll stick with it. And they will make money of it, more sponsorship money, less cost, quite simple math really.
MARCH 29, 2017 Audi to attend next F1 engine meeting The Volkswagen brand Audi will attend a forthcoming meeting about the future of F1's engine regulations. That is the claim of the German-language Spox.com, which says the meeting hosted by the FIA will take place in Paris on Friday to discuss what the next engine formula might look like beyond 2021. Notwithstanding the controversial 'power units' of today, FIA president Jean Todt has ruled out a return to the more popular and louder V10s of the past. But the Frenchman is open to change. "I realise this is a sensitive subject," he told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica. "F1 is the flagship of the motor sport industry, and it must be in line with the technological developments of the industry. "On the other hand it must be a balance to keep it sustainable. The machines today are too sophisticated," said Todt. He also thinks the current cars are too expensive, although Red Bull chief Christian Horner thinks the emphasis of the next F1 engines should actually be the sound. "The best sounding car in Melbourne was a 12-year-old Minardi that had the worst sounding engine then and was hopelessly uncompetitive," said Horner. Even Toto Wolff, boss of Mercedes who have dominated throughout the current 'power unit' era, does not disagree. "If we look into a future generation of engines, I think in the past there wasn't enough emphasis on the sound. So if we can combine great, affordable technology with a lot of horse power and a good sound, that would be really ticking a box," he said.
OK, so it boils down to simplicity, sound and social (relevance). "Sounds" easy. Just do it. I think I've run out of catch-phrases.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVmAfLhpTwo[/ame] that's the Minardi they're on about. Funny that the drivers want better sounding engines, the teambosses, and the vast majority of fans. I'll hammer the cost point again: in the development era of the V10s, engines cost between 180-250k per unit, up to 10x cheaper than current power units. They provided the same amount of horsepower, except the V10's where producing it in the race as well, not just in qualifying. Yes they used more fuel, but IMO they could actually save quite a bit now with newer technology. Back then they didn't even have direct injection, it only came in 2014. From the V8's, after their rev restriction until 2013, IIRC the engines where 14% more efficient than before. So the V10's could definitely have been a lot more fuel efficient, especially with direct injection thrown into it as well. Add into the fact that they didn't have any KERS whatsoever, or 8 speed gearboxes with ridiculous long drive. My ideal formula would be V10 or V12 (not bothered) NA, 4 liter, direct injection and fuel flow restricted with a big KERS system, but a simple version of it not the insanely complicated ones we have now that costs stupid amounts. We'd see 1000+hp, and some 200+ from the KERS. Otherwise, I'd like to see twin turbo V8 with the KERS. Hell, even twin turbo V6, just simplified. Simple, uncomplicated KERS system without the electronic turbos and all that bollocks. Back in the 80s the small v6t's with twin turbo's sounded rather good. There's no reason that a project like Honda can't build a working engine, having thrown well over 100m into it. That tells you everything we need about these engines. Unnecessarily complicated, stupidly expensive.
+1 I emphatically agree. F1 is a sporting spectacle and it must be an exciting experience for the fans. The cars don't have to be ear-shattering loud but the sound must be exotic, engaging to the spectators. I frankly don't get Formula E at all--watching cars circulate in near silence? They should call it Formula Mime.
You can say what you want, many want to see F1 as the spearhead of automotive progress where new technology can be tested and showcased. I suggest most car manufacturers don't want to be involved in nostalgia and yesterday's technology. Atmo V8 are things of the past, not the future; most manufacturers have been there already and don't want to run "Formula Museum" just to make noise around the tracks. Yes hybrid costs, sure it's a new technology mixed with several levels of energy recovery; it's hi-tech and in its infancy, but the return will be enormous. I certainly don't like everything I watch in F1, but I see it as inevitable. That's progress, that we like it or not. F1 cannot be hostage to people who like decibels above everything, surely!!!!
Maybe Todt (and F1) thinks that if he says and does the PC thing he'll get more fan support, or perhaps even appeal to the snowflake millennial crowd who are not that into cars/racing. I can see F1 going all electric sometime in the not too distant future and these BS statements by Todt only help to solidify that thought for me...sad.
I would welcome an electric Formula 1, personally. The automotive industry is heading that way anyway, and the technology around electric cars would progress very quickly with competition. I see hybrid system only as a step towards full electric, that could be almost by-passed.
Unfortunately, I think all road cars will be electric soon enough (either by choice or government mandate)...and when/if they are then F1 will also have to be all electric if they intend to stay on their current course of being the pinnacle of street legal tech...
If the racing is wheel to wheel and exciting I will watch, but I would love to hear the howl of the V-10's again.
Just because something is different doesn't mean its "progress". Where was the progress from the V10 lap record set by MS in the 2004 Australian GP compared to last weekend? 13 years, turbos, kers and $ millions later and they're slower. "Progress" can be defined and interpreted many different ways. But when the majority of fans want a NA engine, and they go to turbos,that to me is not progress. When the drivers themselves want NA engines instead of the PU's of today, that to me is not progress. When you improve the aero, thus making overtaking almost non-existent and races more boring, that to me is not progress. The only reason for this "progress" is due to political BS.
