F1 » Mercedes: New engines won’t mean economy runs


Mercedes has provided a sneak preview of the new era of F1 due to be ushered in in 2014.

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest
Filter Comments: All | Registered

richard

January 12, 2013 7:20 PM

contd. as for kers and ers. is there any difference? power output will be doubled, and time usage will be up from 8 secs to 33 secs (nearly half a lap on some short circuits!)

rbr used mini batteries, so these will hardly be capable for the heavier use.

watching dakar at present. did you know that the MINI is actually a bmw x3 but with a mini shape body on it?

Nelson Lim

January 12, 2013 7:39 PM

The FIA could have just ask the engine manufacturers to reduce the displacement from the current 2.4 litres to 1.6 litres and still retain the V8 configuration. Would have been cheaper and with the addition of the turbo and ERS the difference in lap times would just be a second or two, or maybe even none.

JACKBEE

January 12, 2013 7:54 PM

Nelson Yes, and then we could dust off the old Climax flat 16 FWMW 32valve GP engine that sadly never actually raced!!

Sunny, if the proposed new V6 were supercharged, not turbo charged, would it be more powerful?

richard

January 12, 2013 7:56 PM

nelson. to do that would require a new engine anyway as bore and stroke would be impossible to reduce to provide that capacity!

the cheapest proposal as wanted by ferrari would be to lop two cylinders off the v8, to make it a 1.8 v6. whether or not it could have been turbocharged, remains unanswered

107SS2009

January 12, 2013 8:22 PM

Richard, the exhaust configuration of the single turbo will most probably be a separate three into one from each bank into the exhaust turbine housing at 180 degrees apart and then the mandatory single exhaust tail pipe.
The TERM header's is used when the exhaust piping from the head to the collector pipe are manufactured and tuned individually.
As the FIA is not yet saying that the cars will be topped up with 100 kg instead of 150kg of fuel and instead they only mention “fuel rate limiting” they seems to intend to avoid the impression of a economy run.
I suspect that most probably it will be more of the same regarding the interpretation of this so called fuel restriction as there will be a tendency to draw a greater rate of fuel then intended whilst seen as complying with e rules.

prof-x - Unregistered

January 12, 2013 8:25 PM

2/3 less fuel, 2/3 less power. Pretty sure the engineers know how to get their air/fuel ratios worked out. Turbos add a lot of heat and introduce back pressure, they do increase power, but you have to back off the compression and introduce fuel to make sure your not knocking anything to hard.

These motors are not any more efficient, just made to look to the masses like F1 is interested in the environment. They will be less powerful and sound kind of dull, but if thats what the people in charge want, c'est la vie.

Page 3 of 8
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2014 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.