V10

2004 V10s with modern aerodynamic knowledge would be faster than current cars.

By By.

Allow for both Hybrid V6 at 800 Kg and N/A V10s at 600 Kg and let them race.

Airplanes are not doing much with Hybrid technology,
Boats are not doing much with Hybrid Technology,
Tunnel Boring Machines are not doing much with Hybrid technology,
And on and on and on.....

So, "pretty much everything" does not include those things consuming more fuel energy than all cars taken altogether.

Estimated to be 50-70 years in the future.

Compare the 1000 HP 85Kg V10 (2oo4) to the 1000 HP {25Kg battery pack + 135Kg (Wikipedia) engine}.

Which one is actually more advanced. ... ...


that's the ethos of f1 going back to the start. Going back to v10's would be the the coffin f1 would be laid to rest in imo.[/QUOTE]

 

[/QUOTE]

May we also compare the fuel consumption and the carbon emission of both types of power unit ?

Those are the values we should be concerned about.

Just a thought ...

 

May we also compare the fuel consumption and the carbon emission of both types of power unit ?

Those are the values we should be concerned about.

Just a thought ... [/QUOTE]
Carbon emission will be largely irrelevant if it's an eco fuel.

Long time between 2010 and 2025 but back then F1 carried around 190 liters of fuel (~135 kg) to todays 152 liters (110kg). Fuel efficiency development in those 15 years is enormous.

 

May we also compare the fuel consumption and the carbon emission of both types of power unit ?

Those are the values we should be concerned about.

Just a thought ... [/QUOTE]
This is nonsense. Last time I looked, F1 is shipping thousands of people and huge amounts of kit/freight around the world in huge jets and fleets of trucks. The emissions of the cars are a rounding error compared to the emissions of the sport. All this engine emissions business is pure marketing bs.

 

Isn't the total fuel consumption of the cars over a weekend something silly like less than .1% of all the people/teams etc moving around lol

 

Maybe it is something that will come under scrutiny in future, who knows ?

 

Not sure how we'll go about hosting F1 tracks where teams/fans can't attend. How does the track make money lol

 

Maybe the F1 public of the future will not attend the sporting events, but become virtual spectators from the comfort of their home.

One can imagine that huge public displacements to attend large events (concerts, football, races, all sort of sports, political rallies, etc ...) will become something of the past, solving all transport problems.

 

They will find another way. More advertising, pay-as-you-view, etc ... I am not worried about that.

 

Excellent concerns if you're taking about commuter cars. That's not the topic at hand.

 

[/QUOTE]

And they'd have ran out of fuel at 1/2 race distance with 110kg of fuel. That's what makes F1 tech relevant to modern car companies that have to hit cafe standards with their road cars, and why investing in v10s would make zero sense. Agree battery tech is far away which is why it doesn't being in F1, though I bet if the F1 rules allowed freedom of regulation on battery tech, it would suddenly make large strides....

 

F1 does have pretty large freedom to battery tech. They can make them as small and as efficient as they want. We've seen different voltage charging systems too. Since the beginning of KERS in 2009 the hybrid generators and the battery packs have gotten massively more efficient and far more compact. That is enormous gains in tech. Have we seen any of that go to road cars? Nope.

I swear people think manufacturers actually build the F1 cars. Ferrari is literally the only car company that does. Every other car company invests millions to put their name and their sticker on a car that is built by a dedicated Formula 1 factory.

 

Sounds like they'd better give them 225kg to work with then.

Technology in the service of efficiency is important - but not interesting in the context if racecar. At least not to me. Let's take away the fuel limits and then see where cutting edge technology leads us.

If manufacturers need the fuel limits to market their road cars, then the sport would be better off without them. (Honestly, I think the sport would be better off without them for a number of reasons.)

It won't happen because the current economics would collapse without them, and no stakeholder would let that happen. But I'd love to see a return to the days of independent teams run by racers, like Enzo, Ken Tyrell, Colin Chapman, Frank Williams, Eddie Jordan, etc., etc. They'd be better stewards of the sport than a group of corporate executives pushing a commercial agenda shaped by regulations like CAFE.

 

The independents had their role in building the sport, but financially they would be unable to sustain their effort in a high tech formula now.
Going back to a group of "garagists" would mean a return to a series with simplistic technical regulations preventing progress because the players couldn't afford it. Hardly the pinacle of motorsport !

 

We have different definitions of the pinnacle. This formula is far from it for me.

 

+1

A bunch of manufacturers dictating the rules with the sole purpose/hope so that they can dominate (by outspending the rest) has nothing to do with racing for me. Especially when said manufacturers dangle a threat of leaving every time they don't get their way...

 

Like most of you... I've been watching F1 since I was a kid ... with my dad. I'm 55 now. The one common denominator I think all of what we discuss constantly breaks down to one thing. Is it really about what engine... what tires... what rule... maybe. But what I really feel is at the crux of all our angst and disappointment comes down to just one word: CONTROL

Everything now is about control. Controlling every aspect of racing and development which has actually sanitized Formula 1. Fine... F1 moved tot he 6 cylinder hybrid engine. But then they jump in and CONTROL how, when, and how much you can modify the PU. So even if a team sees a weakness, they can't even fix it. So a backmarker is destined to be a backmarker for years.

The engine itself. Why limit the fuel and more importantly the fuel rate? That extra amount of fuel is not going kill any squirrels. That alone would've been interesting. Maybe some teams would opt for great capacity and weight and let that engine rev to 15 or 16 thousand RPMs like it could've, while other teams went for a lighter car with less fuel and revs. It could've introduced different builds and strategies. Has anyone heard one of they hybrids scream at 16,000 RPM? I haven't. Maybe it would sound great. We don't really know. Also, it could introduced reliability issues and cause some chaos.

I could go on with another dozen examples. Everything has been so sanitized and white-washed and it's all due to one thing: CONTROL

 

Morpheus?

Thanks for the insight "copper top!"

Guess I should've taken the blue pill.

 

This.

 

All more reason to have proper race tracks. Also, I'd be fine losing some of these newer races. The last track that purpose built was COTA. Since then is just slapping together street circuits just to cheaply get in another race. When we had a 17 race season, it was never enough and I was rabid about F1 starting up again for testing and the season opener. That has waned somewhat. I think it's a combination of too many races and too much uneventful GPs. Back when it was 17, there was zero room for error. Every race had monumental consequences. That's been diluted somewhat. I think when you know you have races to recover from a bad weekend it dulls it all a bit. There seemed to be just a completely different level of intensity before we started adding all these races. I think 20 is good and should be the max just to keep it a premier sport. Leave everyone wanting more. Sort of like the difference between football here in the US and basketball.

 

As much as I don't like the Vegas fake show, it does put on some pretty darn good races. Miami can be ditched. Id rather them go back to Indy. The fact they want to add Chicago street circuit makes me want to barf. Would love to see them race around Road America, but that doesn't have nearly the facilities.

It makes me so sad that F1 isn't about the racing at all anymore, it's all about squeezing every last dollar out of everything.

 

Well, F1, like any global public event, is attended by people who use transports to get there, no ?
So, the carbon police will soon start looking at its footprint, same as tourism, travels, etc ...

 

Sounds like an important issue, but one that's unrelated to the engines they run on track. As others have mentioned, the emissions from the F1 cars themselves is less than negligible.