Hybrid Technology

[ukfan758]

I personally don't want to hear vacuum cleaners for the engines at F1 races. I prefer my V10 and V12 engines that were far faster and better sounding than these V6s of today.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I personally don't want to hear vacuum cleaners for the engines at F1 races. I prefer my V10 and V12 engines that were far faster and better sounding than these V6s of today.

It's been explained why that doesn't work and if you like teams walking out on the sport because decadence and nostalgia outweighs the engineering of what Formula has been about for a long time then you don't have a sport. These engines could easily out do any V10 or V12 but there are obvious restrictions that don't allow these engines to be what they can be. The claim that the Mercedes engine currently make 900hp is quite monstrous compared to what the V8s could do. Even the V8s were restricted by rev limiters cutting them down from 21k to 18k just like the current engines are down 3-4k.

The noise isn't all that different from Indy racing that doesn't have ERS and KERS and if you would take the time to understand the technology you'd see why. The nostalgia of fans is easily demolished by the wants of the automotive industry that plays a part in F1 and even allows us to have a sport, which people obviously take for granted. So it's impossible for you to come here and say that the V10s and V12s are faster than the limited V6s. What's even more sad is an engine that revs nearly 10k less and half the size is as powerful as the V10s, then you start looking at the aero advantages the V12 and V10s had during their day compared to what has been taken away from the cars starting in 09...

 

[tribolik]

I too miss the old days... Great races back then... too bad F1 went down the hill.

SARCASM

 

[RACECAR]

I personally don't want to hear vacuum cleaners for the engines at F1 races. I prefer my V10 and V12 engines that were far faster and better sounding than these V6s of today.

Then I take you don't like these either:

 

[BHRxRacer]

Yes, Mercedes and Renault bullied the FIA into accepting these new rules for selfish/silly reasons. Yes, that's where the industry is headed. Doesn't mean it's the right decision.

First of all, F1 isn't a charity championship for the industry. They don't do what they do to help the road cars, road cars just pick up whatever they can along the way, if they can. Wasn't it Enzo Ferrari that said we build road cars to go racing not the other way around? Sure, fuel saving is nice but not at the cost of so much weight. That's not F1.

Another thing, the ONLY reason car makers have succumbed to hybrid technologies is because they were forced to by governments (thanks Obama). Not only is it too expensive, it's also arguably not the most efficient way of saving fuel OR environmental safety. It adds too much weight, almost negating its purpose unless you only drive at very low speeds and constantly stopping*. As for the environment, look at motorcycles. They may produce less CO2 than cars, but they release the kraken with hydrocarbons and other gasses.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Yes, Mercedes and Renault bullied the FIA into accepting these new rules for selfish/silly reasons. Yes, that's where the industry is headed. Doesn't mean it's the right decision.

Bullied? How so, considering the Renault wanted 4 cylinders and Ferrari told them no and thus six cylinders was the next choice. Even if they didn't switch it'd be V8s with this technology on it...I'm pretty sure I know how you might feel about that, but before I assume I'd rather let you state it.

First of all, F1 isn't a charity championship for the industry. They don't do what they do to help the road cars, road cars just pick up whatever they can along the way, if they can. Wasn't it Enzo Ferrari that said we build road cars to go racing not the other way around? Sure, fuel saving is nice but not at the cost of so much weight. That's not F1.

Yeah he said that in the 50s you trying to give it relevance because you cant accept change doesn't make it relevant.

Also F1 is a formula championship and a proving ground which is why groups like Honda, Renault and Mercedes and before them Toyota, BMW and so on took part in them. Just like any other formula type series.

Another thing, the ONLY reason car makers have succumbed to hybrid technologies is because they were forced to by governments (thanks Obama). Not only is it too expensive, it's also arguably not the most efficient way of saving fuel OR environmental safety. It adds too much weight, almost negating its purpose unless you only drive at very low speeds and constantly stopping*. As for the environment, look at motorcycles. They may produce less CO2 than cars, but they release the kraken with hydrocarbons and other gasses.

...Wow, a technology that was gaining steam before even he stepped into the White House but yeah he enforced it that evil tyrant he. How does it add too much weight? And most people are point A to point B drivers thus this suits them quite well. Okay that's motorcycles they're all very dangerous due to others around them and don't transport much either. IF that's your argument that proves hybrids are not efficient or environmentally safe, then all you've done is redirect the conversation rather than backing up your view point with something that actually proves it.

 

[BHRxRacer]

Bullied? How so, considering the Renault wanted 4 cylinders and Ferrari told them no and thus six cylinders was the next choice. Even if they didn't switch it'd be V8s with this technology on it...I'm pretty sure I know how you might feel about that, but before I assume I'd rather let you state it.

Please assume.

As for bullying, threatening to leave unless they make a change is bullying.

Yeah he said that in the 50s you trying to give it relevance because you cant accept change doesn't make it relevant.

F1 is F1. 50s, or 2030. It should be about how fast a car can go, with some restrictions to improve "the show" or safety.

Also F1 is a formula championship and a proving ground which is why groups like Honda, Renault and Mercedes and before them Toyota, BMW and so on took part in them. Just like any other formula type series.

/facepalm. I just said Renault and Mercedes wanted to pull out. I'm aware that's how car makers see F1, as a business opportunity. They're not racing teams like Ferrari were, and what I think Mclaren are now.

That said, it's pathetic that some fans are taking their side. They (makers) do it as a business decision, are you a part of that business? No.

You can "understand" why they do what they do, but defending it so aggressively is rather silly.

...Wow, a technology that was gaining steam before even he stepped into the White House but yeah he enforced it that evil tyrant he.

Yeah because it was only in 2009 that governments were putting emphasis on emissions. *sigh*.

How does it add too much weight?

Really?

Okay that's motorcycles they're all very dangerous due to others around them and don't transport much either.

It's becoming hilarious how you guys nitpick things I say and take them literally. When was this about motorbikes? I used them to illustrate that CO2 emissions aren't everything when it comes to the environment. Why do you always make me feel like I need to say everything explicitly?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Please assume.

As for bullying, threatening to leave unless they make a change is bullying.

Ferrari does it every other year with lesser crap, if spending billions that doesn't go toward anything in the end then they should be able to leave.

F1 is F1. 50s, or 2030. It should be about how fast a car can go, with some restrictions to improve "the show" or safety.

Well then that's quite stupid like most comments you seem to make with the old world rose tinted glasses. Seems like each passing Motorsports thread you become more myopic. What was said in the 50s isn't the same business model as today, since Ferrari race to build better sports cars. Same as McLaren. The cars are going quite fast and the speed traps show faster speeds in than last year. As for safety well that comment is what will probably have me stop commenting to you and your asinine antics, because that should always be number one over what you or any fan wants to see.

/facepalm. I just said Renault and Mercedes wanted to pull out. I'm aware that's how car makers see F1, as a business opportunity. They're not racing teams like Ferrari were, and what I think Mclaren are now.

That said, it's pathetic that some fans are taking their side. They (makers) do it as a business decision, are you a part of that business? No.

You can "understand" why they do what they do, but defending it so aggressively is rather silly.

What's so aggressive? Because I disagreed with you and decided to say something?

I know you said they wanted to pull out what did that have to do with me saying that this is a proving ground for them? You don't know what the hell I'm part of so not sure why you think you can run around as if you do. Also even if I am or am not part of their business that doesn't matter because of the career path I chose the choices they make are of logical sense.

You see this as some emotional fair weather fan.

Yeah because it was only in 2009 that governments were putting emphasis on emissions. *sigh*.

Emission standards in the states had been set long before Obama was a thought in anyone's mind, you might want to actually read and learn automotive history. Rather than sounds like some crazy from Fox News.

Really?

Yes really! Because too much weight is relative and not universal as you seem to think. Many would argue for the application at hand it's a non-issue.

It's becoming hilarious how you guys nitpick things I say and take them literally. When was this about motorbikes? I used them to illustrate that CO2 emissions aren't everything when it comes to the environment. Why do you always make me feel like I need to say everything explicitly?

Then why bring it up, this isn't a discussion on the disparity between motorbikes and hybrid cars, if you don't like how me and others conduct ourselves then by all means put us on ignore or do something. This isn't a blog and you're comments are some special little snowflakes that are to be untouched by the world. This is a forum and people will "nitpick" especially when you come in sounding like a myopic conservative fighting change just to fight it without even trying at all to understand it.

 

[BHRxRacer]

Ferrari does it every other year with lesser crap, if spending billions that doesn't go toward anything in the end then they should be able to leave.




Well then that's quite stupid like most comments you seem to make with the old world rose tinted glasses. Seems like each passing Motorsports thread you become more myopic. What was said in the 50s isn't the same business model as today, since Ferrari race to build better sports cars. Same as McLaren. The cars are going quite fast and the speed traps show faster speeds in than last year. As for safety well that comment is what will probably have me stop commenting to you and your asinine antics, because that should always be number one over what you or any fan wants to see.



What's so aggressive? Because I disagreed with you and decided to say something?

I know you said they wanted to pull out what did that have to do with me saying that this is a proving ground for them? You don't know what the hell I'm part of so not sure why you think you can run around as if you do. Also even if I am or am not part of their business that doesn't matter because of the career path I chose the choices they make are of logical sense.

You see this as some emotional fair weather fan.



Emission standards in the states had been set long before Obama was a though in anyone's mind, you might want to actually read and learn automotive history. Rather than sounds like some crazy from Fox News.




Yes really! Because too much weight is relative and not universal as you seem to think. Many would argue for the application at hand it's a non-issue.


Then why bring it up, this isn't a discussion on the disparity between motorbikes and hybrid cars, if you don't like how me and others conduct ourselves then by all means put us on ignore or do something. This isn't a blog and you're comments are some special little snowflakes that are to be untouched by the world. This is a forum and people will "nitpick" especially when you come in sounding like a myopic conservative fighting change just to fight it without even trying at all to understand it.

at the stuff in bold.

Whether you just have an issue with me or you really don't understand my English, I'm going to stop talking about this topic. You somehow didn't see the sarcasm, missed the point again then said you're doing that because you can.

edit

Just with you

 

[RACECAR]

First of all, F1 isn't a charity championship for the industry. They don't do what they do to help the road cars, road cars just pick up whatever they can along the way, if they can. Wasn't it Enzo Ferrari that said we build road cars to go racing not the other way around?

Yes, because that's how Enzo Ferrari ran his racing team. I'm sure he wasn't exactly speaking for the entire F1 paddock.

 

[ProjectWHaT]

Seeing as how the R18's laser headlights are going to the R8, I bet we'll see some break through in hybrid technology onto road cards pretty soon.

 

[BHRxRacer]

Yes, because that's how Enzo Ferrari ran his racing team. I'm sure he wasn't exactly speaking for the entire F1 paddock.

He wasn't, but it's that kind of spirit that drew me to the sport. I want to see people make race cars because they like making race cars, not because they want make money out of racing them.

Point is: Speed was/should be the end, and not means to it.

 

[ukfan758]

Then I take you don't like these either:

I didn't mind those, they sounded like they had actual power in them and the cars looked much better

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Bullied? How so, considering the Renault wanted 4 cylinders and Ferrari told them no and thus six cylinders was the next choice.

I seem to recall reading somewhere - and unfortunately, I don't have a source - that the inline-fours were initially proposed because Audi were interested in building an engine. When they ultimately decided against it, Renault were happy to revert back to a V6.

Of course, Audi rumors come up so often that you can set your watch by them. So maybe this is just Renault trying to save face.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I seem to recall reading somewhere - and unfortunately, I don't have a source - that the inline-fours were initially proposed because Audi were interested in building an engine. When they ultimately decided against it, Renault were happy to revert back to a V6.

Of course, Audi rumors come up so often that you can set your watch by them. So maybe this is just Renault trying to save face.

I believe in the end it was Renault because they said it was more relevant to their road cars. http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1-engine-debate-rages-on/
http://www.formula1blog.com/f1b-op-ed/ferrari-not-happy-fias-4-cylinder-engine-plan/

I remember hearing it was VW and not Audi, but you're right about that group in general always talking about joining and never following through.

He wasn't, but it's that kind of spirit that drew me to the sport. I want to see people make race cars because they like making race cars, not because they want make money out of racing them.

Point is: Speed was/should be the end, and not means to it.

Then try hard to build a time machine, because it hasn't been about "pure racing" probably since the early 70s to mid 70s. Once money was to be made and tons of it along with furthering along various technologies (not just road going) F1 became that beacon.

at the stuff in bold.

Whether you just have an issue with me or you really don't understand my English, I'm going to stop talking about this topic. You somehow didn't see the sarcasm, missed the point again then said you're doing that because you can.

edit

Just with you

Just with me what? You tend to have issues with many people that speak out against you like PM for example, you I'm the worst of them all? Okay.

Anyways yes, the U.S. has had various nationwide emission standards for decades, and not just the new standards Obama has set in place. Also if you actually knew what your were pounding at your key board about, these type of emissions were strict in various places under Republican ruling.

 

[niky]

Obama, man, who'dve thought we'd hear that name in a thread about Hybrids?

-

Especially when that target of anti-hybrid ire, the Volt, started development during the Bush years.

As a competitive environment, motorsports will develop ERS technologies faster and cheaper than if manufacturers did it on their own.

While I view F1 as only marginally relevant to road car technology, this much is true. Racing is war, and war pushes the development of technology much faster than the absence of it.

-

However marginal the relationship, downsized, turbocharged hybrid engines in F1 are making F1 attractive to manufacturers. More manufacturers means more competition. More competition means better racing.

Even if it doesn't equal better racing at the top of the championship this year, it means better racing down the line, as we get a bigger field and more players in it.

The V12/V10 formula was unrealistic. Costs were sky-high and teams were spending billions to participate... and drop out. The current Formula at least appears to be related to road cars, which is what makes it worth their while.

Formula One isn't about making money. But it shouldn't be about losing money for no reason. In these cash-strapped post-carpocalypse times, a little good PR goes a long way towards keeping the sport (and the spectacle) viable.

 

[BHRxRacer]

Then try hard to build a time machine, because it hasn't been about "pure racing" probably since the early 70s to mid 70s. Once money was to be made and tons of it along with furthering along various technologies (not just road going) F1 became that beacon.

"Pure racing" in terms of what? Track action? The cars? You missed the point again. I was talking about the mentality of racing teams. Maybe it's a reality now they go racing to make money, but doesn't make it any less sad. There's a lot of things in life that have become a reality. We can deal with it, but we don't have to like it.

Just with me what? You tend to have issues with many people that speak out against you like PM for example, you I'm the worst of them all? Okay.

I didn't want to continue this conversation with you because you keep missing the points I try to make, or more ridiculous in that post, not even realize I was being sarcastic.

Anyways yes, the U.S. has had various nationwide emission standards for decades, and not just the new standards Obama has set in place. Also if you actually knew what your were pounding at your key board about, these type of emissions were strict in various places under Republican ruling.

If you actually understood what I was saying, you'd realize I was being sarcastic about Obama the whole the time and that you missed the point completely.

This isn't the thread for it, but if you're interested in what I think of your system; I think both Republicans and Democrats are equally full of **** in different regards, and both of them are too right wing to me. Don't respond to this. Just clearing any misconception that I'm anti Obama. "Thanks Obama" has been a running joke for quite a while, thought I'd use it as an example to show that whole "efficiency" ******** is part of the domino effect started by politicians. The second post was pure sarcasm, but you took it literally and you're still arguing despite me saying it was sarcastic. Again, don't respond to this.

Obama, man, who'dve thought we'd hear that name in a thread about Hybrids?

You too?

While I view F1 as only marginally relevant to road car technology, this much is true. Racing is war, and war pushes the development of technology much faster than the absence of it.

So you accept turning F1 into a martyr for the sake of speeding things up? That's assuming the the direction the industry took is the right one.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

"Pure racing" in terms of what? Track action? The cars? You missed the point again. I was talking about the mentality of racing teams. Maybe it's a reality now they go racing to make money, but doesn't make it any less sad. There's a lot of things in life that have become a reality. We can deal with it, but we don't have to like it.

Um okay, first time you claimed I missed your point was based on sarcasm which is conveyed through tone and sadly the internet doesn't help do that. So if you're being sarcastic in the future you might want to let people know since it's not as thinly veiled as you think.

No I didn't miss the point this time either because that too is what I was talking about and the mental state of teams for the past couple decades going even back into the 80s was development and selling of technology. Even old school teams like Williams make that there biggest priority.

Also if it's sad for you okay, great, but I'm not here to play what's sad and what isn't sad I couldn't care less about peoples emotional shortcomings due to technology.

I didn't want to continue this conversation with you because you keep missing the points I try to make, or more ridiculous in that post, not even realize I was being sarcastic.

No one did it's the internet sarcasm isn't something easily seen over the internet, I'd like to think your not this naive, but you keep surprising me.

If you actually understood what I was saying, you'd realize I was being sarcastic about Obama the whole the time and that you missed the point completely.

You pressed the issue, and even Niky didn't see this well established "sarcasm" you now claim, in effort to save face.

This isn't the thread for it, but if you're interested in what I think of your system; I think both Republicans and Democrats are equally full of **** in different regards, and both of them are too right wing to me. Don't respond to this. Just clearing any misconception that I'm anti Obama. "Thanks Obama" has been a running joke for quite a while, thought I'd use it as an example to show that whole "efficiency" ******** is part of the domino effect started by politicians. The second post was pure sarcasm, but you took it literally and you're still arguing despite me saying it was sarcastic. Again, don't respond to this.

I really couldn't care less yet again what you think, nor do I really want to know. Don't care to argue politics most days because people don't really know what the hell they're talking about so I tend to ignore most political conversations.

 

[niky]

So you accept turning F1 into a martyr for the sake of speeding things up? That's assuming the the direction the industry took is the right one.

l was against hybrids at Le Mans because the way the rules are structured doesn't assure a level playing field. l was against KERS because the way they limited it made it gimmicky... as shown by RBR dominating with the WORST KERS on the grid.

This, l can live with. l don't quite like the 100kg per hour limit, but ERS is interesting, they've got lots of power to play with, and there's the possibility of more power still with further development. One must remember, awesome as the V12s sounded, they were a downgrade from the turbo 1.5s. Even when the rules were rewritten to hobble the turbos, they ruled.

Green advertising may be part of it... but if it makes the cars faster, the racing more challenging, and brings in more players, what's wrong with that? There is room for improvement. Remove DRS restrictions. Remove flow limit. etc. But this is a good platform to start from.

 

[DK]

BHR, where do you think the engines will come from if F1 still used V10s/V12s? Off the top of my head I can only think of Cosworth, Ferrari and, at a stretch, Mercedes.

V10s and V12s are becoming increasingly irrelevant in road cars, as oil supplies continue to dwindle and alarm bells continue to ring to warn us of an impending climatic catastrophe. Yes, supercar manufacturers like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Pagani etc will still use V10s/V12s in their road cars, but the average car owner can only dream of owning those kinds of cars. What use is a big 5000cc+ engine to the average car owner when its fuel consumption is at least four times as much as a sub-2000cc engine?

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

BHR, where do you think the engines will come from if F1 still used V10s/V12s? Off the top of my head I can only think of Cosworth, Ferrari and, at a stretch, Mercedes.

Well Mercedes the team would have pulled out of F1 if inefficient engines were still be used (they said), but I'd say you might be right about the F1 works because they just make good money from it. However, somewhere down the line they would have probably said enough, since the development in an F1 engine cost millions for what? To try and get your money back by selling to teams, who can't always secure funds?

So yeah you're right.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

l was against KERS because the way they limited it made it gimmicky... as shown by RBR dominating with the WORST KERS on the grid.

ERS is now fully integrated into the powertrain, and managed by the ECU. The driver can manually override the ECU and access the power from the thermal system (the MGU-H) directly. But where KERS gave 60bhp for six seconds per lap, the MGU-H offers 160bhp for thirty-three seconds per lap.

And I wouldn't say Red Bull have the worst KERS. The Renault power unit might not be the best, but Lotus, Toro Rosso and Caterham are doing just fine. Red Bull's problem is that they never cared for KERS. Why do you think they - by way of Mark Webber - had so many failures? Between 2011 and 2013, Red Bull had more KERS failures than everyone else combined, and they probably only used it because they had to. It's one of the reasons why the RB10 has been struggling - their knowledge and understanding of the systems is less than the other teams.

 

[niky]

Worst among the frontrunners, maybe. They compromised the reliability and overall capacity of their KERS units in favor of their aero package. Which proved to be a good move, overall. If you're the fastest car on the grid by far, who cares if you give up a little boost?

This year, the power difference is too big to ignore.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

KERS is working full-time now. Energy is used as it is harvested, with the ECU deciding when and where to apply the power. The driver no longer has any control over it.