Formula One change in 2013
#1
Thread Starter
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 8,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: QC/FRANCE
Formula One change in 2013
The grid has been all a-bluster with talk of the coming engine changes for 2013 for months now, but today, it's official: the 18,000 rpm, 2.4-liter V-8 is now on its deathbed in Formula 1, its 12,000 rpm 1.6-liter four-cylinder turbo replacement announced today for the 2013 season. The goal: a "greener" series, cutting fuel consumption by 35 percent.
Of course, a 35 percent improvement in F1 engines equates to about 1 mpg, but that's a significant amount of emissions and fuel across 24-26 cars and about 20 races, practice days, and qualifying sessions.
The new engines will be limited to a maximum of 12,000 rpms--still a rather high figure for an engine with two-thirds the displacement but only half the cylinder count of the outgoing V-8s. In addition to turbocharging (which isn't specificaly mentioned in the release, but is expected), the engines will feature high-pressure direct fuel injection at up to 500 bar, or 7,252 psi. Gasoline is still the requisite fuel.
Energy recovery systems and "additional energy management" will also play a role, meaning KERS is due to come back, though likely in a heavily revised and evolved form by the time the 2013 season arrives.
For those afraid to see turbos and four-cylinders in F1, look back to the early 1980s when manufacturers like BMW managed to extract 900+ horsepower from 1.5-liter turbo fours on 55 psi of boost with a redline around 11,500 rpm--very close to the specs of the 2013 engines, but with another 20 years of technology to draw on. Even better: some of those engines were turned up to 80 psi of boost or more for qualifying, generating as much as 1,300 horsepower. From a 1.5-liter four-banger. In the 1980s. Yeah.
Of course, a 35 percent improvement in F1 engines equates to about 1 mpg, but that's a significant amount of emissions and fuel across 24-26 cars and about 20 races, practice days, and qualifying sessions.
The new engines will be limited to a maximum of 12,000 rpms--still a rather high figure for an engine with two-thirds the displacement but only half the cylinder count of the outgoing V-8s. In addition to turbocharging (which isn't specificaly mentioned in the release, but is expected), the engines will feature high-pressure direct fuel injection at up to 500 bar, or 7,252 psi. Gasoline is still the requisite fuel.
Energy recovery systems and "additional energy management" will also play a role, meaning KERS is due to come back, though likely in a heavily revised and evolved form by the time the 2013 season arrives.
For those afraid to see turbos and four-cylinders in F1, look back to the early 1980s when manufacturers like BMW managed to extract 900+ horsepower from 1.5-liter turbo fours on 55 psi of boost with a redline around 11,500 rpm--very close to the specs of the 2013 engines, but with another 20 years of technology to draw on. Even better: some of those engines were turned up to 80 psi of boost or more for qualifying, generating as much as 1,300 horsepower. From a 1.5-liter four-banger. In the 1980s. Yeah.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG-4s...layer_embedded
#2
Unfortunately it won't be anything like the 80's turbos. Those things had as much boost as they could shove into them, no fuelling limit and were grenades that often only had to last one qualifying session. The new regs have a boost limit and only 5(!) engines per year. It'll take em a few years to get perforamce back up, on the plus side we might see a bit more F1 stuff getting into road cars.
#7
Lexus Champion
Hehe you can primarily blame tree hugger extremists (like Greenpeace) for that.
However for me, the day they mandate the use of diesel fuel in this sport will serve as the last time I'd ever dare to watch Formula 1.
Diesel fuel for Formula 1 = epic fail at its best.
Enjoy your soul-less and revless (probably won't even reach 10,000 rpm) motorsport till then
However for me, the day they mandate the use of diesel fuel in this sport will serve as the last time I'd ever dare to watch Formula 1.
Diesel fuel for Formula 1 = epic fail at its best.
Enjoy your soul-less and revless (probably won't even reach 10,000 rpm) motorsport till then
Trending Topics
#9
Lexus Champion
Lolz
But unfortunately
I too am sadly not a fan of NASCAR because there is basically no thrill or level of technicality by just driving endlessly along an oval track for hours. (I know mmarshall will argue with me on this)
That's just what I think though.
Thankfully, even with these cost-cutting and downgrading, I still don't mind. As long as they don't commit the ultimate sin of mandating diesel fuel for F1, then I still think it's okay.
But unfortunately
I too am sadly not a fan of NASCAR because there is basically no thrill or level of technicality by just driving endlessly along an oval track for hours. (I know mmarshall will argue with me on this)
That's just what I think though.
Thankfully, even with these cost-cutting and downgrading, I still don't mind. As long as they don't commit the ultimate sin of mandating diesel fuel for F1, then I still think it's okay.
#10
#11
A1GP? They would be in the hands of receivers trying to get what money they can. That ain't going to happen. Funny thing is though no one is claiming that the engine change is to cut costs, far from it, going to be pricey to re-engineer everything.
#14
Total marketing sham, pure and simple. F1 just wants to look like they care about the environment. If they really did care, they wouldn't have a dozen racing teams ferry around dozens of team staff and literal tons and tons of equipment to nearly twenty races amounting to over 100,000 travel miles in every single season.
Ya, seems every day I'm getting happier that I decided to buy the LFA. Cars like this simply may not exist in the rather near future.
Ya, seems every day I'm getting happier that I decided to buy the LFA. Cars like this simply may not exist in the rather near future.
#15
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (56)
combined with KERS (kinetic energy recovery system), the move from normally-aspirated v8's to turbocharged inline 4's can be seen as a "green" initiative by formula one.
however, keeping in line with formula one's desire to keep R&D/operating costs for the teams "manageable" (i use the term loosely), the move is also to attract new equipment suppliers and teams, as suppliers and manufacturers balked at the skyrocketing budgets to operate a formula one team for an entire season.
case in point, historically-successful teams such as ferrari and mclaren have operating budgets in excess of $50M - and that may not even guarantee a winning formula (see: red bull racing).
that's why manufacturers such as honda, toyota, and BMW have left formula one, other manufacturers are very reluctant to enter (porsche/audi has been rumored to enter formula one as a supplier as of late, though the rumors have been flatly denied), and why there are very few "new" teams on the grid (bernie ecclestone/formula one requires a $13M guarantee, last i read).
however, keeping in line with formula one's desire to keep R&D/operating costs for the teams "manageable" (i use the term loosely), the move is also to attract new equipment suppliers and teams, as suppliers and manufacturers balked at the skyrocketing budgets to operate a formula one team for an entire season.
case in point, historically-successful teams such as ferrari and mclaren have operating budgets in excess of $50M - and that may not even guarantee a winning formula (see: red bull racing).
that's why manufacturers such as honda, toyota, and BMW have left formula one, other manufacturers are very reluctant to enter (porsche/audi has been rumored to enter formula one as a supplier as of late, though the rumors have been flatly denied), and why there are very few "new" teams on the grid (bernie ecclestone/formula one requires a $13M guarantee, last i read).