I was reading about some of the new F1 restrictions in this article:http://www.f1racing.net/en/news.php?newsID=110636 "The dimensions of the cylinder bore are now limited to a maximum 98 millimetres. The gap between the cylinders is also set out in the rulebook - at 106.5 millimetres (+/- 0.2 mm). The central axis of the crankshaft must not lie any less than 58 millimetres above the reference plane." "Another critical change in the regulations is the ban on variable intake systems." "the regulations have sensibly nipped any natural tendency among the teams to reach straight for exotic - and expensive - ultra-light materials in the bud. The engineers work with conventional titanium and aluminium alloys, as stipulated in the regulations." It seems to me that the F1 is trying to squeeze more innovation out of some other area of the cars or its trying to go NASCAR. Or maybe both!
yeah, i still don't totally agree with the whole V8 thing, but we just have to live with it. F1 will still be as exciting, I hope.
I agree, the v8 rule just stinks. If they want to slow the cars, simply limit engine size, period. Shrink them down to 2 liters, and allow any number of cylanders, no forced induction and let the engineers loose. It's sad to see F1 going down the nascar road. There was a time when 4,6,8,12 and 16s were all allowed, and every team thought they had the best way to a win. Darrell.
F1 racing has made alot of innovations to automobiles and they always seem to squeeze more power & performance out of restrictions as the years pass. In that regard I find it beneficial that restrictions are placed on F1 cars especially since most of us drive 8 cylinder cars. But the narrowing of alloys & metals doesn't make for innovation. Sounds utterly ridiculous to me. IMO a lot of F1 fans are also technophiles. Hey! maybe F1 should do away with carbon brakes in 2007, thats a pesky little innovation in materiels.
The worst part is that not only are they limiting engines to v8 ( just ridiculous) but now limiting many dimentions. I believe ,the fact we mostly drive v8 cars is the best reason for F1 not to run v8s. With that I mean, I would always want F1 to be ultra exotic. Lets face it. nascar runs v8 with over 800 hp, but a v8 with a carb isnt exactly exotic. Diversity breeds inovation, and I hope F1 is always at the cutting edge. Darrell.
All of you are probably the first to say how "F1 is the panicle of engineering" but when the rules change and the teams have to live up to that statement all of you just moan about how much it's going to suck. Even with the V8 rule and reduced aero package the cars aren't too far from last years cars as far as speed goes. I'd figured that it would have taken till the end of this season before they'd clawed back all of the speed they'd lost but the way it's looking now they may be able to do it by mid season. If I'd have my way not only would the current rules have been applied but I'd get rid of refueling and no tire changes! That'd put the tactical decisions back in the hands of the drivers an not in the hands of the engineers on the pit wall.
He knocked off .462s off Kimi's previous unofficial record. http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=27244 So, do the V8s still suck?
I think that Ferrari's are really cool.......i especially like the red ones.........but i dont see the point of blue and yellow ferrari......they look so bad
F1 has not always been the PINNACLE of engineering, but frequently enough has been the top rank of technology, and almost always the summit of motorsports. By giving in to the narrow interests of a parochial industrial consortium it is becoming just another racing series, one of a sort of which several already exist. ...It's shameful.
Charles YOU may like the nascar like mandates that continue to come down to the teams, but I would guess many of us "MOANING" would rather see a much more diversified field. Sure the cars will get faster. Nascar gets faster all the time, but it is certainly not known for innovation in motorsports. By the way, I don't think anyone is moaning, I believe it's called discussing a topic. Thats the whole point of the website isnt it?
It certainly is. But, I might just dig up some of the threads from the end of last season... there wasn't much, "do you think this will help?" or "Could there be a better way?" It pretty much was a lot of people *****ing about the new rules and how it was going to destroy the sport further than it's already been. I'm all for diversification. But, I haven't heard any good ideas on how that should be done except in the IRL/CART thread. And FWIW Im not a NASCAR fan but I do highly respect anyone that competes in the series. Racecar drivers are racecar divers.
I agree with ya on the drivers point. Nascar or not those guys can drive. One of the interesting reasons I had heard for the v8 switch was for financial reasons. Stating it would cost less to develope a v8 versus a v10 or v12. I laughed a bit at that one. I just hope it doesn't turn into a "spec" class ala IRL. There is no doubt the racing will be good, it wolld just be great to hear different engine configurations going at it once again. Plus I love the trickle down of technology that we the consumer gets. Best regards. Darrell
The biggest down fall in the rules as I see it is the fact that every team has the same engine layout. I really miss the days of the different configuration and different engine notes. I wouldn't have the problem with the rules I currently do if each team was given the opportunity to choose as many cylinders as they please. I really long to see a V12 on the grid again. Mark
It would be cool to have diversity in engine layout. Are you old enough to remember BRM Flat 16s, Cosworth V8s, Ferrari V12s all living togeather in peace and harmony ? Well maybe not exactly.. The engine type and size truly doesnt matter if the level of competitiveness is about equal. 16,12,10,8,6,4... not really important in the entertainment arena of the sport and that is really what drives any Pro sport.
Idon't go back far enough to remember the flat 16's. But do remember walking through the Kendall paddock at Watkins Glen (with earplugs) and seeing/hearing the Cosworth V8's, Ferrari V12's, BRM v12's and the shrill ear piercing scream of th Matra V12's. That was late 60's into early 70's when each team car had a horse stall size pit to work in and fans could stroll down the alley at will . Fun stuff !
You'll never have engine diversity again; maybe one or two dissenters out of the lot who goes off with something unproven, but nothing like there used to be. They're fighting between revvability and combustion chamber shape (ie, the more oversquare the better it revs, but the more difficult it is to burn the mixture efficiently). The current bore/stroke are pretty close to as good as they can get with current head designs. The V12s were easier to setup in this regard, but obviously heavier and longer, and consequently detrimental to handling. The V10 was the best they could do overall for the car given the minimum chassis weights and dimensions. This all said, if they didn't mandate the V10 I'd be surprised if in the last decade we didn't see a couple V12s pop up in the mix. Given how far metallurgy has come, a lot of the handling woes could theoretically have been downplayed by now (Ferrari was working on a titanium block V12, but couldn't seal it to the aluminum cylinder heads). I'm not so sure V8s really had a place anymore in the 3.0L class, but you never know. I doubt any flat engines would have come back, too much of a PITA to package. I think a lot of these rule changes are put in place just to keep us poor schmucks here at our keyboards jabbering away; F1 stays on the radar during the off season.
No, I am only 22 and wasn't watching the sport back then but have seen countless hours of older races and truly think it's ashame to not have diversity among engine layouts. Back then you could tell what car was coming by the sound you heard, not so much today. Mark
I will not notice of care about the lack of any of these.... I think much of the "pinnacle" chest thumping that goes on is related to tech that is good for nothing more than mental masturbation. Everything listed above is "invisible" to the fans (buried deep within the can and good for .0001 of a second of lap time). Yet is the source of millions of dollars of development cost which eventually results in what we had last year-- ten teams which could have very easily been 8 or even 7 teams. I doubt there is a material exotic enough to make me interested when the sport has priced the concepts of competition and parity. There is a balance point, where than can be meaningful development that both the fans and engineers can appreciate without raising costs so high that only a few major companies can afford to participate in the sport, that is until their board of directors decides that it is too expensive.
Autoweek had a couple funny comments about the new rules. First, they mentioned how the new engine rules, while made in an attempt to slow cornering speeds, will ultimately increase them. This is due to the smaller engines that will allow for "tidier" aero packages, smaller ducts, and so on. The other comment was by either Patrick Head, or Ron Dennis (too lazy to go upstairs and look) who wryly commented that having to design all new engines is an interesting approach to saving money.
Here's part of the article: The reduced engine size also means an even more earnest search for revs, and more revs means more money. As Head says, "We could not have found a more expensive way of reducing horsepower."
I think Darwin would find partnership between F1 & the teams interesting. F1 tries to make teams conform & the teams are given enough wiggle room to evolve.
This is exactly true. Changing the rules and forcing R&D is not the optimum way of reducing costs. Besides if I was running a team and had $400 million to blow, I think I'd find way to spend it. If the big teams have the money, they will find somewhere to put it looking for that extra tenth of a second. Unless there is a strict budget cap, I really don't see costs going down significantly anytime soon. Mark
Mark your right. Making a budget cap is the only way TO cap spending. You could mandate 1 cyl. engines and the F1 teams would spend MILLIONS making sure it's the fastest 1cyl engine around. there is no cost difference in developing a 8,10,or 12. Darrell.
