Therein lies the problem. Commercialism wagging the sport.There is no way you can say that a fuel restricted 1.6 Hybrid V6 is the pinnacle of motor sport! It is just a sop to attract money and involvement from the big manufacturers. I agree with Nos...set a capacity limit or whatever but have a free rein with how you use that capacity. Let entrepreneurial small teams have some chance to use ingenuity and inspiration to steal a march. Sure, there will be epic fails like the BRM 16 cylinder but there will also be startling plusses like ground effect cars that have to be legislated out. But that technology 'churn' is so much more exciting than cars which are packaged so similarly that all we can talk about are the artistic merits of their probosci!
Club Scuderia
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Please take a minute to read this thread about our recent server issues and forum platform Switch
Pathetic noise
- Thread starter AJ3XX
- Start date
Therein lies the problem. Commercialism wagging the sport.There is no way you can say that a fuel restricted 1.6 Hybrid V6 is the pinnacle of motor sport! It is just a sop to attract money and involvement from the big manufacturers. I agree with Nos...set a capacity limit or whatever but have a free rein with how you use that capacity. Let entrepreneurial small teams have some chance to use ingenuity and inspiration to steal a march. Sure, there will be epic fails like the BRM 16 cylinder but there will also be startling plusses like ground effect cars that have to be legislated out. But that technology 'churn' is so much more exciting than cars which are packaged so similarly that all we can talk about are the artistic merits of their probosci!
Try watching this for a reminder of where we have been. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EctHizz_yNo
If you scroll through to 5 minute point, you can hear what a 1.5 V6 turbo can sound like.
If you scroll through to 5 minute point, you can hear what a 1.5 V6 turbo can sound like.
Mallard
New member
Yep, nice sound but it's a small engine having loads of fuel pumped in that will with a bit of luck last a race.
I enjoyed the racing, the overboost used for overtaking, the special engines used for qualifying.
It was of it's time.
J70
New member
As for "Commercialism" - it might be a cynical view, but F1 is only a sport for about 100hrs per annum - the rest of the time its a business, and I do think these new regs have a good chunk of grounding in business continuity, but anyway we've done that to death with regard to "pinnacle" - I disagree.
Regs demand.
1.6Litre single tubo.
With energy recovery systems and a battery.
and limited fuel with a max fuel rate.
and a tyre compound that really hates wheel spin.
The fuel limit means you can't just throw fuel at it, it needs to be managed and optimised - even on a quali lap, but over a race (and I confess I dont think we've seen this yet, but it promotes the opportunity for "hare and tortoise") it needs to be managed as it ebbs and flows according to race strategy - but also demands that you develop a "kick-ass" energy recovery system to supplement the petrol power, as without, you'll loose.
And ... going into a corner, under braking - they need to develop systems to "fly by wire" harness the wasted energy from the brakes - but feel like a hydraulic "feel" system to the driver (especially as it transitions between modes) - and not include an element of ABS, and because the driver is "off throttle" the turbo will slow, so at some point it, or another system, needs to divert some of the electrical system to pre-spin the turbo so its "ready" on corner exit - but "ready" to an extent where it doesnt spin the wheels - but NOT include an element of traction control. And the same systems need to decide how much energy they use on "pre-spin" and making brakes feel right, so they know how much is available to the driver in terms of "umph" and so it needs mapping so that the "spend" is the same (or less) as the "gather" , and the more spend available, the faster the straightline will be and hence the more options the team has on aero. But I bet the gather alters round the lap and isnt as trivial that gather in one corner is enough to provide the perfect spend for the next straight - so that'll need managing too, and managing over a race throwing tyre deg and fuel burn into the mix - so the driver gets predictable power and can hence accurately spot braking points etc.
And of course, turbos and batteries and generators and petrol engines develop a lot of heat, yet much prefer to be cool - so that needs managing and designing in (hence the rumour that MB have split the turbo onto a long shaft keeping the hot bit away from the compressor so that the air charge is cooler, thus allowing them to make a smaller package but also "waste" less energy making the charge cooler)
But also, aero is still king so you need to package all of the above in as tiny a package as possible.
Oh and you need to make it work on flat out blast tracks like Monza, Canada and Spa, but also tight twisty street tracks like Monza and Singapore
And it also needs to work in high temp high humidity conditions , but also potentially a chilly Northamptonshire - but work within the constraints that its a standard ECU.
I genuinely think these new cars are technical marvels (and I am sure they are orders of magnitude more complicated than I have guessed above) and am mega impressed with how many finish a race. I remember back to when turbos came in last time, the Renaults would fire off into the distance, then explode, but were so fast the other teams knew it was the direction. I also remember the 1000+ hp qualifying hand grenade engines with black vapour trails of unburned fuel tearing up the track and the very wierd noises they'd make on overrun. They were a sight to behold. But I was genuinely expecting, when we all sat down to watch Australia, that Max Chilton would be in the points by virtue of being one of the last men standing.
But F1 needs to re-invent itself every now and then. Last year we were definately into a phase where powertrain , suspension, braking and even driving had been "optimised" with the best aero (RBR) rising to the top. It needed a shake up.
Had there been minor tweaks only this season, then RBR would have romped, TV ratings would have been down, promotors* would have been moaning at BE as ticket sales would have been down - races would have moved (probably away from Europe) to emerging nations who just want to be "on a global map".
(* and I wouldnt be suprised if the noise about noise has a lot to do with the promotors looking for a reduction in race fees....)
Plus, with a fairly static driver market - in terms of former world champions, most of whom have "been around a bit" , I'm finding these new cars must be so different to drive and so it feels like the "older" ex-Champions have more baggage to unlearn compared to their "young guns" team-mates, that their younger team mates are shaking things up. Who would have put money on Ricciardo doing so well against Vettel? or K-Mag or Kyvat or Bottas? (Admit I could be wrong on that, but am enjoying the dynamic)
So no, I do think its "pinnacle status confirmed" with cars that are very clever, but also difficult to drive - so the clever engineers and talented drivers will rise to the top - and thats what I want.
And if the price I have to pay is a quieter engine note, I'm happy. And as I said before, if all this clever stuff finds its way onto my future road car -and if legislators tell me I cant have a fire splitting V8 but I can have (an effective) 300hp+ from a 1.0Litre "eco-hybrid-planet friendly" sports car, and at the same time sports car manufacturers are permitted to make 1000hp "Its a whole different thing" Hypercars for me to drool over and so Hybrid becomes a buzz word for "good thing" , then win!
All fair mate. The only place we disagree is that I think F1 should be pushing the tech for the "1000hp "Its a whole different thing" Hypercars" while you seem to be saying it should be pushing the tech for "1.0Litre "eco-hybrid-planet friendly" cars. We simply disagree on that point, I still enjoy the races :thumbsup:
As I said off line - the tech is quite impressive but due in part to stifling innovation it's not a patch on the tech out there with the latest generation of military jets like the F35 and I mean not even on the same page. Compare anything on these cars with just the sensors and helmet coming in on an F35 where you can look down straight through the floor of the jet as if it wasn't there, at night in cloud, and see a SAM site that's totally invisible to the naked eye and too far away to be seen even if the weather was perfect, have the jet identify it as hostile, designate it by voice and fire a missile at it without ever changing course, and you'll see what tech can do. And it's a whole heap more than slightly cleverer batteries and recovery systems than last year. The fact that on an F1 car the amount of energy that is allowed to be recovered is limited, as is the amount of torque that system is allowed to deliver, and the minimum weight of it, will quite obviously stifle the development of it - when you hit those numbers you can do no more other than make it more reliable.
The directives nail down development too much to seriously push the boundaries of what's possible and you're right - it's for commercial reasons, it's aimed at the big manufacturers of more ordinary cars, and F1 is after all a business. I just wish it wasn't
As I said off line - the tech is quite impressive but due in part to stifling innovation it's not a patch on the tech out there with the latest generation of military jets like the F35 and I mean not even on the same page. Compare anything on these cars with just the sensors and helmet coming in on an F35 where you can look down straight through the floor of the jet as if it wasn't there, at night in cloud, and see a SAM site that's totally invisible to the naked eye and too far away to be seen even if the weather was perfect, have the jet identify it as hostile, designate it by voice and fire a missile at it without ever changing course, and you'll see what tech can do. And it's a whole heap more than slightly cleverer batteries and recovery systems than last year. The fact that on an F1 car the amount of energy that is allowed to be recovered is limited, as is the amount of torque that system is allowed to deliver, and the minimum weight of it, will quite obviously stifle the development of it - when you hit those numbers you can do no more other than make it more reliable.
The directives nail down development too much to seriously push the boundaries of what's possible and you're right - it's for commercial reasons, it's aimed at the big manufacturers of more ordinary cars, and F1 is after all a business. I just wish it wasn't
Matt, that's all well and good. And excellently argued.
BUT...watching F1 is all about spectacle. Visual, aural and visceral. It should grab you by the nuts.
And this just doesn't. Well, it no longer grabs me. And after 40 years of losing most summer Sunday afternoons with my nose pressed up against a CRT/LED screen, I guess my wife will get me back for the weekend! So, OK, its great....Somebody wins!!!!:grin:
BUT...watching F1 is all about spectacle. Visual, aural and visceral. It should grab you by the nuts.
And this just doesn't. Well, it no longer grabs me. And after 40 years of losing most summer Sunday afternoons with my nose pressed up against a CRT/LED screen, I guess my wife will get me back for the weekend! So, OK, its great....Somebody wins!!!!:grin:
J70
New member
No thats fair enough.
I remember the spine tingling experience the first time I heard an F1 car in the flesh.
I remember taking my kids to a free Renault day at Donnington just so that they could hear an F1 car - the rest of the day was irrelevant, I wanted them to experience that.
I remember often being at F1 events when we were lucky enough to experience just one car doing a relatively slow installation lap and you could hear exactly where it was on the circuit - even from a mile away.
(plus all the ground shaking lunchtime demonstrations of earlier cars)
And I completely agree that they should be very very loud.
But certainly Monaco this weekend is going to be very visual and the drivers will certainly earn there wages (as will the engineers getting the torque maps right)
J70
New member
No, what I'm saying is am sure 1.0litre eco-hybrid is coming to us all anyway whether we like it or not - thats not F1 driving that, its pressure from legislators etc - the F1 hybrids and spin offs (and the Le Man spec cars) will hopefully drive forward an "option" to comply with the legislators, but retain "Petrolheaded"-ness in roadcar design.
And there is the parallel with the 1000hp "Whole different thing" cars - Ferrari could have , a) 700hp Normal engine. b) or gone down the "conventional hybrid" route of 500hp normal, supplemented with 200hp electric motor ie reducing the "normal" to suit , but instead they went c) Additive Hybrid - use the extra bits to make More power.
I appreciate thats subtle - its a bit akin to a job I've got on my desk this morning - a lighting design for a shop.
Option a) Ignore the big plate glass window - design a level of lighting assuming 4 solid walls.
Option b) Take advantage the of the plate glass window, and the shop usually open in daylight hours - reduce the power of the lighting to suit.
Option c) Take the advantage of the window, and the lighting - to make it much brighter than it needs to be.
(Obviously in this case I'm doing b) , a) was the conventional wisdom, b) saves energy and the regs are driving me towards that . But the La Ferrari does c) More.)
The other thing I don't like about the current homogenisation is that it restricts the engineering voyages of discovery that may be todays problem but are tomorrows solution.
Look at how Japanese motorcycle engineering killed the British industry in the 70's.
British engine design at the time was based around long stroke, low revving, high torque engines. This gave them a characteristic high Brake Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP). Although good for economy and low down performance, the less advanced engineering of things like mating faces meant that the engines blew gaskets and leaked oil. The Japanese came in with low BMEP, high revving motors that wiped the floor with the Brits in terms of performance and reliability. Great and revered industries came crashing into the dirt.
Wind forward 4 decades.
By common consent, probably the most amazing engine in the current marketplace is the Ford 1 litre triple EcoBoost. Stupendous power per litre output, high torque, superb economy. It will even lug a C-Max around at credible speeds. And why? It revisits the long stroke/high BMEP philosophy. Improvement in manufacturing techniques means it is oil tight. Bung a turbo on and you have a world beater.
This is a very long winded way of saying that Formula 1 should be much more heterogenous and rebellious rather than pursued to the dictat of commercial interests. In the long run, those serendipitous discoveries/rediscoveries will be better for the future of mechanised transport.
Just my tuppenorth. And it bit off beam of pathetic noise...but you get my drift??
Look at how Japanese motorcycle engineering killed the British industry in the 70's.
British engine design at the time was based around long stroke, low revving, high torque engines. This gave them a characteristic high Brake Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP). Although good for economy and low down performance, the less advanced engineering of things like mating faces meant that the engines blew gaskets and leaked oil. The Japanese came in with low BMEP, high revving motors that wiped the floor with the Brits in terms of performance and reliability. Great and revered industries came crashing into the dirt.
Wind forward 4 decades.
By common consent, probably the most amazing engine in the current marketplace is the Ford 1 litre triple EcoBoost. Stupendous power per litre output, high torque, superb economy. It will even lug a C-Max around at credible speeds. And why? It revisits the long stroke/high BMEP philosophy. Improvement in manufacturing techniques means it is oil tight. Bung a turbo on and you have a world beater.
This is a very long winded way of saying that Formula 1 should be much more heterogenous and rebellious rather than pursued to the dictat of commercial interests. In the long run, those serendipitous discoveries/rediscoveries will be better for the future of mechanised transport.
Just my tuppenorth. And it bit off beam of pathetic noise...but you get my drift??
J70
New member
Just saw a link to this story on Twitter, and googling has revealed a better explanation of how it works:
http://www.electricautosport.com/2014/06/formula-e-fanboost-feature-revealed-works/
In Formula E - (testing starts at Donington next week) , fans are going to be able vote for some of the drivers to get extra power (for short durations) in the race.
I guess this time last week I'd have thought it "a bit strange" , but after the world motorsports council announcements last week regarding F1, nothing is now strange.
http://www.electricautosport.com/2014/06/formula-e-fanboost-feature-revealed-works/
In Formula E - (testing starts at Donington next week) , fans are going to be able vote for some of the drivers to get extra power (for short durations) in the race.
I guess this time last week I'd have thought it "a bit strange" , but after the world motorsports council announcements last week regarding F1, nothing is now strange.
Hey, why not go the whole hog and re-create that great scalextric trick of the flipper where you could press a button and the little plastic flap would spring up and toss your competitor off the track!!https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=s...R-CAR-EJECTOR-FLIPPER-%2F171317087868;300;225
Got to say, even though near the beginning of this season I was very much in the 'it'll never be the same' camp, the new era of F1 has slowly grown on me. Ok, I'd like some more noise, but the racing itself is not so bad. The fact these cars have torque to spare is really meaning that driver skill seems to be even more important out of every corner, setting the car up for every straight. I could have lived without the bleating on the radio but watching Vetel and Alonso battling it out was fantastic as was watching top drivers coming through the field. And I have actually got used to the noise, actually quite like that you can tell what the car is doing from 'in car'. I still prefer the old, loud cars, but the new is just different.
Didn't think it'd grown on me but I was wrong - it's not so bad really.
Be even better if Ferrari could build a competative car and stop relying on one Spaniard to stop them looking totally outclassed.
Didn't think it'd grown on me but I was wrong - it's not so bad really.
Be even better if Ferrari could build a competative car and stop relying on one Spaniard to stop them looking totally outclassed.
J70
New member
Am so glad you werent with me when I went to the Formula E test at Donington then.... :laugh:
I've never been to a motorsport event in a vehicle louder than what I'd gone to see.
But.. I quite liked it. It wierd. Its different. And... OK, I'll never prefer it, but it has a place.
I'm impressed with their setup and the organisation, and it looks an interesting calendar - my only real dissapointment is that during the races they swap cars not batteries during pit stops.
Maybe its not do-able, but if part of motorsports remit is to develop tech to be cascaded to road cars, then "hot" battery swaps would be a fantastic future option for EV's if it could be developed.
As for F1, I continue to enjoy the racing, I continue to get irritated with pundits (normal) , and I assume were about to migrate shortly into the "silly season" in terms of driver contracts (I think it will probably be the quietest one for a while actually, Alo will be the head domino) , and I'm torn how I want to rest of the season to pan out. If the "others" catch Merc , and hence their constructors championship looks (even mathematically) in doubt, then I wouldnt be suprised if team orders are issued - which I dont want, but I do want the others to catch...
I agree with Pete, apart from the radio "banter" , Alo/Vet at Silverstone was really exciting, except when you realise that despite having 6 championships between them, and their constructors many many more, it was a battle for 5th and 6th , in arguably the 3rd and 4th best car - not the lead and not for the win.
I am puzzled however about this ban on the FRIC suspension being imposed at the weekend. a) because its mid-season, and b) because (and am not sure, but I think) its a clever technical thing, that rewards the innovators.
And I do remain concerned that F1 might be about to implode unless they do more works on its appeal and also cost cutting to maintain a field - so "noise" still remains at the bottom of my list of fixes.
Oh, look, I'm really intrigued by the Formula E thing. I think that is something worth keeping a close eye on. At the moment, F1 is caught with its feet in both camps, at the behest of the big car manufacturers who are leveraging hybrid as a halfway house between ICE and full electric.
I'm the first to admit that people are resistant to change. I see it all the time at work. And I fully admit that I am resisting the change to hybrid F1 technology. For me and my generation fast cars = NOISE. The more noise the better, the more our pulses race, the more excited we get about the racing. If there is anyone under 30 reading this, what do YOU think of the latest F1 cars??:grin:
I'm the first to admit that people are resistant to change. I see it all the time at work. And I fully admit that I am resisting the change to hybrid F1 technology. For me and my generation fast cars = NOISE. The more noise the better, the more our pulses race, the more excited we get about the racing. If there is anyone under 30 reading this, what do YOU think of the latest F1 cars??:grin:
J70
New member
Nobody in our house is the slightest bit interested in F1 - except me.
They were a bit tacitly interested in Le Mans.
But I took my 16yr old daughter , who being post GCSE's is a "lady of leisure" , to Doninton and she was very interested in Formula E (and asked me to remind her of the name of the lady engineer on the #1 Audi at Le Mans so she could google her right up) As a test I even tried to put a very negative spin on the "green credentials" pointing out the coal fired powerstation in the distance, but she was convinced that technology was interesting and wanted to know more, will probably watch it on telly and wants to go to the London race.