Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday September 18, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > News & Rumors > Non-Subaru News & Rumors

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-16-2006, 09:30 PM   #1
NYCshopper
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 5126
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: www.nugateway.com
Default Turbo Charged Engines in F1 by 2011 ???

Turbo Charged Engines in F1 by 2011 ???

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns17774.html

Max Mosley of the FIA and Burkhard Goschel, the main in charge of the GPMA, announced yesterday that they are now in agreement on all the major issues involved in Formula 1. This is what they said.

(the interview is very big....so click on the link for the entire read)

Quote:
What about turbocharging? When might that come in and what engine sizes would be used?

"The capacity would be up for discussion," said Mosley, "because we don't want to have a ridiculous level of horsepower. What we would be looking at is probably bringing in the regulation in 2011. There would then be a fuel-flow valve and you would size the engine so it still ran up in the 18,000-19,000 bracket, because that's what a racing engine is. Certainly, 15,000 plus. Then the size of the engine could be a function of the fuel you were using, probably a bio fuel, the amount of energy that teams were recovering from the brakes and then re-using, because that would increase the total power of the drivetrain, plus the energy recovered from surplus heat from the engine, also additional power for the drivetrain, and taking all those things into account we wouldn't want to have much more power than we have today. So you would work back from those parameters and that would then determine the size of the engine."

"I agree," said Goschel. "We have to develop the full picture of all components and then in the end we have to decide what kind of engine it is. But it has to be a racing engine, a real racing car, the top league of a race car. That is clear."
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
NYCshopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:11 PM   #2
Rapid_Roo
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 31511
Join Date: Jan 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: W|LA. Ca.
Vehicle:
03 GD2 95 GM4
www.ITNRally.org

Default

I wonder what they mean by Bio-fuel
Rapid_Roo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:18 PM   #3
dodiox
Visiting NASIOC Timeout
 
Member#: 85718
Join Date: Apr 2005
Vehicle:
06 WRX
Cobb Stage 2

Default

WOOOOOOSSHHHHH!!!
dodiox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:20 PM   #4
Evil STI
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 36792
Join Date: May 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: NNJ HamfistRacing.com
Vehicle:
2014 Camaro 1LE
gold chains & meatballs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid_Roo View Post
I wonder what they mean by Bio-fuel
Quoted from Wikipedia:
"Biofuel is any fuel that is derived from biomass recently living organisms or their metabolic byproducts, such as manure from cows. It is a renewable energy source, unlike other natural resources such as petroleum, coal and nuclear fuels.

One definition of biofuel is any fuel with an 80% minimum content by volume of materials derived from living organisms harvested within the ten years preceding its manufacture."
Evil STI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:29 PM   #5
Chromer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20325
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Vehicle:
08 Yamaha WR250R
07 Suzuki DL650

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid_Roo View Post
I wonder what they mean by Bio-fuel
Turbocharged engines LOVE alcohol. Although the lower energy density would cause them a weight (or more-frequent pit stops) penalty.

Do they really expect to have braking-energy recovery and engine waste-heat recovery systems on the cars in 2 years (for the 2009 season, from article)?
Chromer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:29 PM   #6
jigga
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 9960
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: in bed...
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza WRX
WRBlue Perl

Default

i'm not sure why it irks me when they comment about trying to restrict things really... Isn't formula one racing supposed to be the pinnacle of technology and what the manufacturers can do on the track? If i want to see spec racing, I'll tune in for a nascar event or a Formula Ford race or something... I for one love the days when new tricks and ways of doing things were brought in and one could see the effect of these novel ways of thinking in the performance of the cars. I loved the days of active suspension and all the good stuff... very exciting days and made me wonder..."what will they think of next?" These days, occurences like that are rare, and when it does come, the FIA bans it immediately... makes one wonder what the point is? (obviosly, cost, but in case they have not noticed, F1 already is not a game for lowballers...)
jigga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:43 PM   #7
FrankRizzo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 76243
Join Date: Dec 2004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigga View Post
i'm not sure why it irks me when they comment about trying to restrict things really... Isn't formula one racing supposed to be the pinnacle of technology and what the manufacturers can do on the track? If i want to see spec racing, I'll tune in for a nascar event or a Formula Ford race or something... I for one love the days when new tricks and ways of doing things were brought in and one could see the effect of these novel ways of thinking in the performance of the cars. I loved the days of active suspension and all the good stuff... very exciting days and made me wonder..."what will they think of next?" These days, occurences like that are rare, and when it does come, the FIA bans it immediately... makes one wonder what the point is? (obviosly, cost, but in case they have not noticed, F1 already is not a game for lowballers...)
Couldn't have said it better myself. Long gone are the days when a 6-wheeled car would show up at the track. (For those that don't know, YES, there WAS a 6 wheeled formula 1 car.) Obviously they're trying to get the cost down to increase the team counts, as if it were car counts that they were worried about, they'd just increase the "2 cars per team" limit.

I wonder if we'll soon see a Prius out there with a big wing on the back. With all the "tree-hugger crap" that they're trying to do now.
FrankRizzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 10:44 PM   #8
Chromer
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 20325
Join Date: Jun 2002
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Vehicle:
08 Yamaha WR250R
07 Suzuki DL650

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigga View Post
i'm not sure why it irks me when they comment about trying to restrict things really... Isn't formula one racing supposed to be the pinnacle of technology and what the manufacturers can do on the track?
Read the whole article (or even just the first few paragraphs): They want to freeze engine development precisely so that the manufacturers will concentrate on other potential areas of performance improvement.

That ain't being hippy, it's being smarter. They could go back to the v10's if they just wanted more power. An example from the article was that the car's brakes generate about 8000hp hauling them down from 320kph to 80kph. It'd be real nice to be able to store that and use it down the straight instead of venting it out the wheels as super-hot carbon dust...
Chromer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2006, 11:24 PM   #9
jigga
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 9960
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: in bed...
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza WRX
WRBlue Perl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromer View Post
Read the whole article (or even just the first few paragraphs): They want to freeze engine development precisely so that the manufacturers will concentrate on other potential areas of performance improvement.

That ain't being hippy, it's being smarter. They could go back to the v10's if they just wanted more power. An example from the article was that the car's brakes generate about 8000hp hauling them down from 320kph to 80kph. It'd be real nice to be able to store that and use it down the straight instead of venting it out the wheels as super-hot carbon dust...
yeh, read the article... sounds like a receipe for nascar action imo...
If they wanted more power, they wouldn't look at V10 engines... they would go back to the small displacement turbo engines they were using back in the early 80's which were making more than they have today. The technology is already tried and tested, but yup, got banned...

i still reckon they should allow the game to progress without restricting things so much... As is now, almost everything about the cars are all shaped by the rules. it's hard to see what exactly has come from the manufacturers themselves. It is so bad that the dividing factor now between cars is who's tires are at each axle of the car.... boring.....

Look at that balancer that Renault brought out this year in the nose of their car...yeh... that got banned pretty quickly...

imo, freezing engine development and forcing teams to look elsewhere for performance gains also drives up the cost of the sport.. Year after year, they are being asked to squeeze 10 dollars out of 50 cents... If that isn't an expensive endevour, I'm not sure what is..There are big gains to be had in F1, but they are all illegal. There are many technologies that are readily available and have been tried already in the 80's and 90's but got banned almost as soon as they showed... All of the time they spend tweaking aero parts in the wind tunnel and making parts from ever more exotic materials also drives up the cost... At the end of the day as is now, the winner is he who has the deepest pockets really... I want to see the winner be he who build's the better mouse trap so to speak.

They need to get with the program is you ask me... The game is not cheap...it is bloody expensive. They know it, we know it.They should quit trying to sugar coating it and trying to make it out as something it isn't...it's super expensive, and supposed to showcase just what is possible from the manufacturers, be it on the engine front or chassis technology. With them making a switch back to turbocharged engines and running on biofuels, will costs not be driven up yet again over what they are right now as teams have to start a-new on this new technology?

Ultimately though, manufacturers take part in the sport for bragging rights... not to see if it is possible to get 20mpg out of an 800HP formula 1 engine, or make super grippy tires that last the way through a race. If that is what they were there for, the sport will not look like it does today..

The FIA is trying to run after and catch 2 chickens at opposite ends of a room at the same time... can they catch one while catching the other?
jigga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2006, 08:19 AM   #10
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

Here is the problem in my eyes. Reducing the cost of racing is impossible. The teams with the most money is still going to win. Even if F1 is an entirely spec series (I think Max would love that) does that mean that Ferrrari is not going to spend the same 400 million that they spend now. It will be spent on wind tunnel testing, Simulations, Testing, etc.

At the other end as much as I love all the fancy active suspensions and turbo engines, and active aero that the teams could definitely do, how do you regulate it. Racing has always been about who can cheat the most and not get caught. Not every team has a Micheal Shumi who can develop a car and then exploit it beyond what it should probably do.

As much as I hate to admit it, he is probably the greatest modern day Formula 1 driver. He managed the car developement, team, and himself very well.

I too get sick when they take the tech out of F1, half the fun is watching the engineering race as much as the drivers.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2006, 09:20 AM   #11
dvang
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 84188
Join Date: Mar 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: its too cold
Vehicle:
05 legacy
caravan full of kids now

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid_Roo View Post
I wonder what they mean by Bio-fuel
hose connected to the penis for urine to feed the motor BIOFUEL
dvang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2006, 09:47 AM   #12
gargleblaster
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 11107
Join Date: Oct 2001
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Rky Mtn High
Vehicle:
2015 WRX STi
Crystal White Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankRizzo View Post
I wonder if we'll soon see a Prius out there with a big wing on the back. With all the "tree-hugger crap" that they're trying to do now.
You'd probably see that Prius win before the current Toyota squad does.

I think Max Mosley and all of the ridiculous non-safety regs should be banned from F1. Let the engineers advance automotive technology in the pursuit of performance untethered.
gargleblaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2006, 11:11 AM   #13
scott_gunn
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 4203
Join Date: Feb 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Vehicle:
2009 WRX 5spd hatch
Platinum Silver Metallic

Default

They should have a displacement limit and nothing else. Let the people who can do the most with technology from that point on win.
scott_gunn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2006, 11:23 AM   #14
rubinm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 63483
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Ski Town USA
Vehicle:
2005 STi HTA68'd+e85
Aspen White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
The teams with the most money is still going to win. Even if F1 is an entirely spec series (I think Max would love that) does that mean that Ferrrari is not going to spend the same 400 million that they spend now.


I too get sick when they take the tech out of F1, half the fun is watching the engineering race as much as the drivers.

Your first statement is simply not true. Toyota has the largest budget in F1, yet they continue to do so so and have yet to claim a championship. Next to Toyota is Ferrari- who put up a fantastic effort this year, yet failed to surpass Renault. Renault's budget is yet again less than that of Ferrari, yet they have now claimed two consecutive World Championships.

Though Budget is a big aspect of a team's success, it's not always the determining factor in a world championship.

all in all I too agree with your frustration about FIA regulations and Engine design caps. I believe F1 should be the ultimate showcase of technological development. Just think if Audi had never been allowed to race at all with AWD..... things would be different.
rubinm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2006, 12:14 AM   #15
jigga
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 9960
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: in bed...
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza WRX
WRBlue Perl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubinm View Post

Though Budget is a big aspect of a team's success, it's not always the determining factor in a world championship.
drivers, tires, good luck, and the team who is able to impliment a novel idea and milk it before the FIA knows about it and bans it since nobody else has it, or because it is too ingenious....
jigga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2006, 08:56 AM   #16
SCRAPPYDO
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 873
Join Date: Feb 2000
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Just outside of Houston TX
Vehicle:
2013 F150 King Ranch
Datsun 71 240Z & 68 2000

Default

I agree, but a team with 400 million dollars can try more things than a team with 100 million. While money does not guaranty success, ala Toyota, It dramatically improves your chances. You keep throwing enough money at something, you will eventually succeed. If Toyota keeps up this pace of spending, and It probably will, they will be the F1 champs one year. They just have too much good engineering. They made great strides this year, and I look for them to quickly gain speed. I also think Honda will do quite well.
SCRAPPYDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2006, 11:05 AM   #17
dvon1981
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 101442
Join Date: Nov 2005
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Boston
Vehicle:
2008 Impreza 2.5i
Dark Gray Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapid_Roo View Post
I wonder what they mean by Bio-fuel
bio ethanol
dvon1981 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2006, 04:56 PM   #18
rubinm
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 63483
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Ski Town USA
Vehicle:
2005 STi HTA68'd+e85
Aspen White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO View Post
You keep throwing enough money at something, you will eventually succeed. l.
i would agree that toyota has some great engineers, and eventually their time will come, yet when you continutally throw money at a problem, it doesnt always solve the problem. thats not the way to handle a situation, and may only work from time to time.

it takes ingenuity, time, skill, some damn fine engineering, and some luck to succeed. budget is not the end all-
rubinm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 02:25 AM   #19
jigga
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 9960
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: in bed...
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza WRX
WRBlue Perl

Default

i think they need botht he budget and good drivers who are on the boil.... I don't think they have the latter right now.
jigga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 06:59 PM   #20
Snowphun
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 1800
Join Date: Jul 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Way South Shore MA
Vehicle:
WRX /Cooper S/Miata
awd/fwd/rwd

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scott_gunn View Post
They should have a displacement limit and nothing else. Let the people who can do the most with technology from that point on win.
Safety has no concern for you? They've proven time and time again that the cars get far too fast without restricting performance. There need to be practical limits, and this also helps some of the slower teams be more competetive.
Snowphun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 07:01 PM   #21
Snowphun
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 1800
Join Date: Jul 2000
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Way South Shore MA
Vehicle:
WRX /Cooper S/Miata
awd/fwd/rwd

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankRizzo View Post
I wonder if we'll soon see a Prius out there with a big wing on the back. With all the "tree-hugger crap" that they're trying to do now.
Great attitude. Why not continue to use F1 as a test bed for high tech features like energy recovery? How can you possibly call something that generates more power a bad thing?
Snowphun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 08:57 PM   #22
KAX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 63292
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Vehicle:
2000 Subaru 2.5RS
2002 WRX powered

Default

they dont need an engine displacement limit, they need a fuel limit. Youre never going to get good MPG racing if you dont cap the fuel. do like they do with tires, limit the amount and they work with that. You run out of tire at the end of the race, you lose; you run out of fuel at the end of the race, you lose. and nothing can go wrong when you dont have fuel, that car just shuts off, rather then go spinning into a wall when your suspension breaks.

as for the other reg's, I dont mind it. teams will still invent and update, they have to every year if they want to win. Whether the FIA bans things or not, its not going to stop them from trying to win. They arent going to say "hey it worked so far, why change it?" because everyone else who didnt work is going to change it, and they already know the benchmark to surpass. but if fuel efficiency is a big goal, then they need to limit fuel input.
KAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 09:19 PM   #23
AruisDante
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 122365
Join Date: Aug 2006
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Worcester, MA
Vehicle:
1999 BMW 330i ZHP
GSM

Default

The primary reason for the engine pwerformance cap is because they're trying to limit the speed of the cars, because when something goes wrong, they don't want people dying. F1 cars were hitting over 200MPH on some courses, and a driver crashed and was killed. Immediately they lower the displacement of the engines by another .5 liters, in an effort to try and reduce top speeds, to try and reduce the likelihood of fatalities from crashes. Really, if they wanted to do that, they should just do what the JGTC does, and simply put a horsepower restriction on the cars, then let the manifs go to town on inventing the best way to get that horsepower, whether it be a high revving, small displacement NA or a low revving high (comparatively) displacement turbo motor.

As for the storing energy from braking, it's really not that radical a consept. You simply attach the axels to a flywheel that is only connected when the brakes are engaged. That flywheel will then store all of the enegery that is put into spinning it up. It's the exact same principle that is used in the regenerative braking on a Prius. When the brakes are let off, connect that flywheel to the drivetrain and boom, all that power that was stored in the flywheel then is transfered back into the forward motion of the car, and the engine hasn't had to do a thing. And the move to Biofuel is an enviromental thing, just like Audi is pushing diesel LeMans cars now a days. Really, they're trying to see if people can find other ways to make their cars fast besides horsepower, because that's a technology that, as people have pointed out already, as been pretty much perfected since the 80's.
AruisDante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 11:15 PM   #24
KAX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 63292
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Vehicle:
2000 Subaru 2.5RS
2002 WRX powered

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AruisDante View Post
The primary reason for the engine pwerformance cap is because they're trying to limit the speed of the cars, because when something goes wrong, they don't want people dying. F1 cars were hitting over 200MPH on some courses, and a driver crashed and was killed. Immediately they lower the displacement of the engines by another .5 liters, in an effort to try and reduce top speeds, to try and reduce the likelihood of fatalities from crashes. Really, if they wanted to do that, they should just do what the JGTC does, and simply put a horsepower restriction on the cars, then let the manifs go to town on inventing the best way to get that horsepower, whether it be a high revving, small displacement NA or a low revving high (comparatively) displacement turbo motor.
why would you limit power? that makes no sense. this isnt GP2 or F3000 where its supposed to be all about drivers. the point is driver/car combination, so having a horsepower limit is silly.
KAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-2006, 11:51 PM   #25
NismoSkylineGTR
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 94622
Join Date: Aug 2005
Default

i hope they keep na the high rev engine sounds GOOOOOOOOOD
NismoSkylineGTR is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2011 Buick Regal returns (only 4-cylinder, made in Germany by Opel) Eyeflyistheeye Non-Subaru News & Rumors 16 12-02-2009 11:02 PM
Infiniti M Hybrid coming in 2010! Europe to get it by 2011 AVANTI R5 Non-Subaru News & Rumors 3 08-05-2009 01:24 AM
Automatic tran on Turbo charged engine zulustick Newbies & FAQs 21 05-30-2009 10:38 PM
What engine should I turbo charge for an L? adam555 Normally Aspirated with bolt-on Forced Induction Powertrain 11 09-21-2002 09:38 PM
Any Turbo-Charges Forresters in here? wrxman555 Forester Forum 1 03-02-2001 08:33 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.