planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:51 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic

Which type of engine do you prefer
Poll runs till Fri Dec 08, 2017 5:23 pm
Current V6 Hybrid 21%  21%  [ 15 ]
Previous V8 17%  17%  [ 12 ]
Whichever is the most powerful and/or makes the cars fastest 30%  30%  [ 21 ]
Whichever is noisiest and/or least fuel efficient 8%  8%  [ 6 ]
Whichever are most affordable for the non-factory teams 24%  24%  [ 17 ]
Total votes : 71
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
Herb Tarlik wrote:
In both cases, those who dont like the sound loud are in the vast minority.

That's your opinion, yes.

Herb Tarlik wrote:
Formula One has been blazing loud for decades and no one ever complained about it.

That's false.

Herb Tarlik wrote:
I went to 3.5 liter engine races, 3.0 liter races and 2.4 liter races and not once did I hear a complaint that it was too loud. Crowds of people loved it, were attracted to it, and were excited by it.

I wonder if that had anything to do with the fact that the people who thought it was too loud just didn't go? I've been to four GPs since the V6s were introduced, and I haven't heard any complaints about the lack of noise. Does that mean they don't exist?

Herb Tarlik wrote:
Some people like silent racing. They are in the distinct minority. Deal with it.

I'm sure they are. We're talking about people who don't like having their bones shaken by the noise however, which isn't actually the same thing as silent racing.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 1406
v10 or v12


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 9:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9674
Location: Ireland
Herb Tarlik wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.


You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

If FE doesn't exist then it's F1 that will eventually go down the battery route. There's no escaping it. So the longer you poop all over FE = the longer you want F1 to continue with green technology, eventually making it to electric-only

I don't know why it's predominantly Americans that struggle with FE. Any FE-related Facebook post and you have one group of people engaged in chat about a sport + comments from (usually) Americans talking bollox peppered throughout the comment thread. I rarely see non-US folks coming into IndyCar or NASCAR articles and running their mouths off. On the face if it, it appears to be a weird backward fossil fuel-driven thing, which gives me further insight as to why they voted the guy they did into power

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1568
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.


You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

If FE doesn't exist then it's F1 that will eventually go down the battery route. There's no escaping it. So the longer you poop all over FE = the longer you want F1 to continue with green technology, eventually making it to electric-only

I don't know why it's predominantly Americans that struggle with FE. Any FE-related Facebook post and you have one group of people engaged in chat about a sport + comments from (usually) Americans talking bollox peppered throughout the comment thread. I rarely see non-US folks coming into IndyCar or NASCAR articles and running their mouths off. On the face if it, it appears to be a weird backward fossil fuel-driven thing, which gives me further insight as to why they voted the guy they did into power


Your assumptions show an extreme level of ignorance that should prove to be highly embarrassing to you. Politically I would be classified as a left leaning progressive, as anti Trump as you could possibly state. I am profoundly embarrassed by whom we have as a president and cannot wait for the day he is impeached. I have a $100 bet riding on him not surviving his 4 year term.

Formula One has absolutely nothing to do with the future of the auto industry. If F1 went back to fire breathing V10's, the push to change cars will continue unarrested.

For those infatuated with silent battery racing, there is Formula E. If battery racing is indeed so great, then why isnt that your favored racing series? Why do you have to have Formula E AND Formula One?

Your total blindness to history and tradition is staggering. There are countless people who have watched F1 for 30+ years and like it. They dont want to see it fundamentally changed. Change is OK when it is done within the confines of its traditions.

If battery racing is so popular, so much better, then it is only a matter of time until Formula E surpasses Formula One.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1568
Exediron wrote:

I wonder if that had anything to do with the fact that the people who thought it was too loud just didn't go? I've been to four GPs since the V6s were introduced, and I haven't heard any complaints about the lack of noise. Does that mean they don't exist?



Nonsense. There have been many many complaints about the noise all over F1. The head of the FIA doesnt like the sound. The commercial rights holder does not like the sound. Team principles dont like the sound. FFS, anyone who has been asked in F1 has stated that the engines NEED to change.

That you havent heard anything about it just shows how tight your blinders are on.

F1 race attendance has not gone up since the hybrid engines appeared and in many cases, gone down dramatically. I've sen huge declines in race attendance in both Shanghai and Malaysia.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9674
Location: Ireland
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.


You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

If FE doesn't exist then it's F1 that will eventually go down the battery route. There's no escaping it. So the longer you poop all over FE = the longer you want F1 to continue with green technology, eventually making it to electric-only

I don't know why it's predominantly Americans that struggle with FE. Any FE-related Facebook post and you have one group of people engaged in chat about a sport + comments from (usually) Americans talking bollox peppered throughout the comment thread. I rarely see non-US folks coming into IndyCar or NASCAR articles and running their mouths off. On the face if it, it appears to be a weird backward fossil fuel-driven thing, which gives me further insight as to why they voted the guy they did into power


Your assumptions show an extreme level of ignorance that should prove to be highly embarrassing to you. Politically I would be classified as a left leaning progressive, as anti Trump as you could possibly state. I am profoundly embarrassed by whom we have as a president and cannot wait for the day he is impeached. I have a $100 bet riding on him not surviving his 4 year term.

Formula One has absolutely nothing to do with the future of the auto industry. If F1 went back to fire breathing V10's, the push to change cars will continue unarrested.

For those infatuated with silent battery racing, there is Formula E. If battery racing is indeed so great, then why isnt that your favored racing series? Why do you have to have Formula E AND Formula One?

Your total blindness to history and tradition is staggering. There are countless people who have watched F1 for 30+ years and like it. They dont want to see it fundamentally changed. Change is OK when it is done within the confines of its traditions.

If battery racing is so popular, so much better, then it is only a matter of time until Formula E surpasses Formula One.

You've completely mixed up what I said. But there's no surprise there. Nowhere have I said "battery racing" is better. Nowhere at all

One of them has to take the electric route on board. It's not going away, whether you like it or not. The manufacturers call the shots, not the fans. If FE isn't around to take up the mantle then it's going to be F1. So the more you and others like you want to see FE fail, you are de facto calling for F1 to be the standard bearer of electric racing

I am quite up to speed with the history of F1. But I'm not the one who embarrasses himself on this forum clutching to rose-tinted ideals of ancient history

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2537
Location: UK
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.


You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

If FE doesn't exist then it's F1 that will eventually go down the battery route. There's no escaping it. So the longer you poop all over FE = the longer you want F1 to continue with green technology, eventually making it to electric-only

I don't know why it's predominantly Americans that struggle with FE. Any FE-related Facebook post and you have one group of people engaged in chat about a sport + comments from (usually) Americans talking bollox peppered throughout the comment thread. I rarely see non-US folks coming into IndyCar or NASCAR articles and running their mouths off. On the face if it, it appears to be a weird backward fossil fuel-driven thing, which gives me further insight as to why they voted the guy they did into power


Your assumptions show an extreme level of ignorance that should prove to be highly embarrassing to you. Politically I would be classified as a left leaning progressive, as anti Trump as you could possibly state. I am profoundly embarrassed by whom we have as a president and cannot wait for the day he is impeached. I have a $100 bet riding on him not surviving his 4 year term.

Formula One has absolutely nothing to do with the future of the auto industry. If F1 went back to fire breathing V10's, the push to change cars will continue unarrested.

For those infatuated with silent battery racing, there is Formula E. If battery racing is indeed so great, then why isnt that your favored racing series? Why do you have to have Formula E AND Formula One?

Your total blindness to history and tradition is staggering. There are countless people who have watched F1 for 30+ years and like it. They dont want to see it fundamentally changed. Change is OK when it is done within the confines of its traditions.

If battery racing is so popular, so much better, then it is only a matter of time until Formula E surpasses Formula One.

So what is it about the current format of F1 that has gone outside the confines of its traditions? As far as I'm concerned, F1's 'tradition' is no more than having the fastest drivers in the fastest cars with no stipulation about the amount of noise those cars must produce. It just so happens that the fastest car is no longer the one that makes the most noise. Embrace the future.

If you still truly believe that hybrids and battery power are all about being 'green' then you really need to better educate yourself on the subject.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1568
j man wrote:

So what is it about the current format of F1 that has gone outside the confines of its traditions? As far as I'm concerned, F1's 'tradition' is no more than having the fastest drivers in the fastest cars with no stipulation about the amount of noise those cars must produce. It just so happens that the fastest car is no longer the one that makes the most noise. Embrace the future.



Then explain why every every driver and every team who has spoken out against the current hybrid engines has been against their lack of noise. Explain that.

This single fact alone shows how completely wrong your argument is.

No one wants to embrace that future. :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1568
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.


You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

If FE doesn't exist then it's F1 that will eventually go down the battery route. There's no escaping it. So the longer you poop all over FE = the longer you want F1 to continue with green technology, eventually making it to electric-only

I don't know why it's predominantly Americans that struggle with FE. Any FE-related Facebook post and you have one group of people engaged in chat about a sport + comments from (usually) Americans talking bollox peppered throughout the comment thread. I rarely see non-US folks coming into IndyCar or NASCAR articles and running their mouths off. On the face if it, it appears to be a weird backward fossil fuel-driven thing, which gives me further insight as to why they voted the guy they did into power


Your assumptions show an extreme level of ignorance that should prove to be highly embarrassing to you. Politically I would be classified as a left leaning progressive, as anti Trump as you could possibly state. I am profoundly embarrassed by whom we have as a president and cannot wait for the day he is impeached. I have a $100 bet riding on him not surviving his 4 year term.

Formula One has absolutely nothing to do with the future of the auto industry. If F1 went back to fire breathing V10's, the push to change cars will continue unarrested.

For those infatuated with silent battery racing, there is Formula E. If battery racing is indeed so great, then why isnt that your favored racing series? Why do you have to have Formula E AND Formula One?

Your total blindness to history and tradition is staggering. There are countless people who have watched F1 for 30+ years and like it. They dont want to see it fundamentally changed. Change is OK when it is done within the confines of its traditions.

If battery racing is so popular, so much better, then it is only a matter of time until Formula E surpasses Formula One.

You've completely mixed up what I said. But there's no surprise there. Nowhere have I said "battery racing" is better. Nowhere at all

One of them has to take the electric route on board. It's not going away, whether you like it or not. The manufacturers call the shots, not the fans. If FE isn't around to take up the mantle then it's going to be F1. So the more you and others like you want to see FE fail, you are de facto calling for F1 to be the standard bearer of electric racing

I am quite up to speed with the history of F1. But I'm not the one who embarrasses himself on this forum clutching to rose-tinted ideals of ancient history


Yet again you go out of your way to misrepresent what I have said. Never have I hoped for the failure of Formula E. Quite the opposite. I hope it is a resounding success so that those who enjoy whiny battery powered engines have a place to go and see the racing and technology that excites them the most. I sincerely hope that Formula E thrives and that more and more manufacturers support the series.

Is that clear now? Can you properly understand my position?

I think that is a pretty generous position, unlike those who think that battery racing needs two series, to the detriment of those who enjoy a racing series that has existed for 70+ years.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 5:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1748
Formula E is great. IMO the cars look much better than F1 cars with their stupid front wings.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 10:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
Herb Tarlik wrote:
That you havent heard anything about it just shows how tight your blinders are on.

That was, in fact, precisely the point I was making. There have always been people who didn't like the sound, you just ignored them.

That said, I'm 100% telling the truth that I've never heard someone complaining about the lack of noise at a GP. That doesn't mean I don't think they exist - I'm sure they do - it's just that listening for people complaining about an event they're actually at is a poor way of gauging public opinion. People who are at a GP have better things to do than bitch about the lack of noise constantly. Luckily for all of the rest of us.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1568
Exediron wrote:

That was, in fact, precisely the point I was making. There have always been people who didn't like the sound, you just ignored them.



News flash: I dont like baseball. I think it's a pretty boring sport. Yet I dont try to change into something I'd like to the detriment that others who do like it as is.

If people dont like the noise in Formula One, then they are free to not go to those races and find something else.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Exediron wrote:

That was, in fact, precisely the point I was making. There have always been people who didn't like the sound, you just ignored them.

News flash: I dont like baseball. I think it's a pretty boring sport. Yet I dont try to change into something I'd like to the detriment that others who do like it as is.

If people dont like the noise in Formula One, then they are free to not go to those races and find something else.

Doesn't that argument work just as well flipped around on you?

But this is getting absurd. You're - once again - basically claiming that the noise is F1, and that if I don't like the engines ear-bleedingly loud I should find a different sport. Why the **** should I do that, when F1 has so many things that are unique to it and I'm highly interested in? You're comparing not attending a sport you fundamentally find boring with not attending a sport you love but just think is too loud.

Formula 1 is more than noise. You say you get that, but a lot of your posts don't read like it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9674
Location: Ireland
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
mcdo wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

If FE doesn't exist then it's F1 that will eventually go down the battery route. There's no escaping it. So the longer you poop all over FE = the longer you want F1 to continue with green technology, eventually making it to electric-only

I don't know why it's predominantly Americans that struggle with FE. Any FE-related Facebook post and you have one group of people engaged in chat about a sport + comments from (usually) Americans talking bollox peppered throughout the comment thread. I rarely see non-US folks coming into IndyCar or NASCAR articles and running their mouths off. On the face if it, it appears to be a weird backward fossil fuel-driven thing, which gives me further insight as to why they voted the guy they did into power


Your assumptions show an extreme level of ignorance that should prove to be highly embarrassing to you. Politically I would be classified as a left leaning progressive, as anti Trump as you could possibly state. I am profoundly embarrassed by whom we have as a president and cannot wait for the day he is impeached. I have a $100 bet riding on him not surviving his 4 year term.

Formula One has absolutely nothing to do with the future of the auto industry. If F1 went back to fire breathing V10's, the push to change cars will continue unarrested.

For those infatuated with silent battery racing, there is Formula E. If battery racing is indeed so great, then why isnt that your favored racing series? Why do you have to have Formula E AND Formula One?

Your total blindness to history and tradition is staggering. There are countless people who have watched F1 for 30+ years and like it. They dont want to see it fundamentally changed. Change is OK when it is done within the confines of its traditions.

If battery racing is so popular, so much better, then it is only a matter of time until Formula E surpasses Formula One.

You've completely mixed up what I said. But there's no surprise there. Nowhere have I said "battery racing" is better. Nowhere at all

One of them has to take the electric route on board. It's not going away, whether you like it or not. The manufacturers call the shots, not the fans. If FE isn't around to take up the mantle then it's going to be F1. So the more you and others like you want to see FE fail, you are de facto calling for F1 to be the standard bearer of electric racing

I am quite up to speed with the history of F1. But I'm not the one who embarrasses himself on this forum clutching to rose-tinted ideals of ancient history


Yet again you go out of your way to misrepresent what I have said. Never have I hoped for the failure of Formula E. Quite the opposite. I hope it is a resounding success so that those who enjoy whiny battery powered engines have a place to go and see the racing and technology that excites them the most. I sincerely hope that Formula E thrives and that more and more manufacturers support the series.

Is that clear now? Can you properly understand my position?

I think that is a pretty generous position, unlike those who think that battery racing needs two series, to the detriment of those who enjoy a racing series that has existed for 70+ years.

Then p!ss off with this condescending crap
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1096
These are my opinions. I do not state them as absolute facts.

To me it appears that fans are split into two bunches on this issue. Some see Formula One as an exciting race series, while others perceive the sport to be a demonstration of advanced automotive technologies. In the past, those two concepts were able to live under the same roof. But Formula E may be the future while fossil fuel powered power plants definitely face a termination date.

And since now those two different perceptions may come into conflict, we arrive at this standoff in this thread.

Personally I have placed Formula One firmly in the entertainment camp. And thus, I can accept that Formula One may become obsolete or even outlawed. But I am OK with that, at one time horse or sailboat racing was HUGE because they were the primary modes of transportation before technology made them obsolete as primary sources of transportation. That is where I see Formula One in the future, in the same category as the America's Cup or the Kentucky Derby. If I am alive then, I won't shed a tear because the sport is not holy, nothing, absolutely nothing lives forever.

In the other camp ( I apologize to those who embrace both concepts because I am talking about extremes) Formula One is where the factories develop and demonstrate advanced technologies, and should change with the times. I will not disrespect any belief, those in this camp have a perfect right to hold this attitude.

The Formula E series is sanctioned by the FIA. So we see where the FIA currently have these two series, Formula One and Formula E. IMO they are covering their bases because even the FIA does not know how relevant Formula One will be in fifty years.

Liberty are now the commercial rights holder, and it is no secret that they are embracing Formula One as an entertainment medium. And despite this seeming standoff between them and Formula One, if push comes to shove, Liberty will call Ferrari's bluff because the second they acquiesce (I like to throw in at least one rarely used complex word a day lol) they have surrendered control of a business they paid a lot of money for. I'm talking Business 101 here, you must control your assets.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 3:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1096
Blake, I was referring to 2017 cars in discussing loud and cool engine sounds. One of the sweetest sounds I ever heard was a BSA 750 triple with a 3 into 1 megaphone. Another was the Ferrari 512M which also created those orgasmic sounds. We used to revel in being able to follow it around the track, even though it may be as much as a mile away and sharing the track with 20 other cars.

My point is that for me, Formula One and it's associated experiences should be memorable and powerful. With the current situation, who can sincerely say that they still expect to get a thrill when they recall today's engines twenty years from now?

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Sun Nov 12, 2017 6:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1748
It might have been because I was streaming on my phone at the time but I thought the cars sounded better than normal on the formation lap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
GingerFurball wrote:
It might have been because I was streaming on my phone at the time but I thought the cars sounded better than normal on the formation lap.

Any time you're watching the direct FOM feed they sound better. It's the TV networks that mess with the sound and make them sound like garbage. They really sound like you hear on personal recordings or uncommentated parts of a session.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1748
Exediron wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
It might have been because I was streaming on my phone at the time but I thought the cars sounded better than normal on the formation lap.

Any time you're watching the direct FOM feed they sound better. It's the TV networks that mess with the sound and make them sound like garbage. They really sound like you hear on personal recordings or uncommentated parts of a session.

I was streaming on Sky Go. So it was still Sky's feed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1550
Location: Miami, Florida
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
See, this is where EVERYONE here could go to a track and go into the garages of different types of cars/engines just to hear them rev, and I can say with 1,000,000% certainty that the ones that would leave everyone in awe and make every one feel excited would be the ones that make them feel their ferocity in their bones. Why do I know this? Because I've done this very thing for both 4-wheels and 2-wheels. Been there for Nascar, CART/ChampCar, F1, MotoGP, AMA, and Superbikes. And I went to so many Miami Grand Prix when it was held in bayfront park in the streets of downtown Miami and there you got to hear just about every engine type all in one race, not to mention over the entire weekend.

No, you can't. You can say with whatever absurd certainty you want that you and people like you would feel that way. I know people who hate the feeling of vibration in their bones from sound, so how likely are they to love those engines? Not at all.

There are people who love a rock concert with the volume at ~120 dB. There are people who hate it, and would prefer to listen to the same music quietly on their headphones. Not everyone is like you: deal with it.

And those people are likely not racing fans, so I fully understand them not caring for louder engines, so I don't factor them into my assessment of the situation.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1550
Location: Miami, Florida
RaggedMan wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I think that's a bit of a loaded poll, tbh. Think you should at least have an option for fast yet affordable. Many people object to the hybrids on cost and complexity grounds, not performance

Agreed but it's a poll that paints real fans into a corner buy not listing the most desirable engine for the majority of fans which is a V10.

Of all the engines listed however, I'd Opt for the V8 because it is an excellent engine that sounds great, is reliable, and the rev limit can be raised a few thousand RPM which would improve both sound and performance. It was also much less expensive than the current money drain that is the current v6 Hybrid.

As such I cannot cast a vote because what I "want" isn't listed.

And here comes the "No true Scotsman" argument again.

I'm a real fan but don't think the most desirable option is a naturally aspirated V-10, or really any V-10.

It's this type of argument in the other thread that caused this poll to be created. I agree that the pole is limited in the number of choices but you're free to offer up your preference, as you have. The problem is that you offer it as what "real race fans" want instead as your own opinion. That some agree with that opinion doesn't mean that those who don't aren't "real race fans."

See, this is where EVERYONE here could go to a track and go into the garages of different types of cars/engines just to hear them rev, and I can say with 1,000,000% certainty that the ones that would leave everyone in awe and make every one feel excited would be the ones that make them feel their ferocity in their bones. Why do I know this? Because I've done this very thing for both 4-wheels and 2-wheels. Been there for Nascar, CART/ChampCar, F1, MotoGP, AMA, and Superbikes. And I went to so many Miami Grand Prix when it was held in bayfront park in the streets of downtown Miami and there you got to hear just about every engine type all in one race, not to mention over the entire weekend.

So while I agree the current PU has come around to sounding really stellar (ironically, honda's unit is by far the best sounding IMPO), I do feel the decibel level should be amplified a good bit, and having heard so many engines/types over my lifetime, I know there are far better sounding engines that would get the job done just as well and at a disgustingly better price point, so why would anyone prefer the current, lackluster sounding units?

Blinky, as much as I love that Porsche sound, it's TOUGH to pick just one car that sounds the best.
Personally I prefer the Mp412c GT3 sound (sadly McLaren deleted the video from the channel with the superb audio)

But a serious case can be made for the Mazda 787B.
Why they didn't continue with that program is beyond me. I think it's Mazda's greatest piece of anything they've ever produced.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjwwV20iZYE
https://youtu.be/gMzLjgTArUI?t=781
https://youtu.be/A5d8YhAbg5g?t=229

As for your point on the cost of Engines at Indy, I fully agree and that would make it far easier for teams to enter F1. For a team like Manor the engine budget was almost half their entire operating budget. That cannot be moving forward or teams will have to slap these units onto soap box cars in order to take to the grid. It's just not right for a sport that struggles to keep teams on the grid year after year. What if Force India lose all their backing due to Mallya's legal issues? Could they survive such a thing with the price point for the current PU's? I'm not so sure they can.

You quoted me but argued against a post by Blinky it seems.

I grew up in SoCal in the 60s & 70s so I too have experienced many types of race engines from many different disciplines. I can agree with you about the visceral feeling that older loud donkey engines can evoke, but as a fan what I want to see is performance.

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.

Just because an engine is loud doesn't mean it's archaic or from the Mesozoic period. While there are more advanced engines today, the last V10's in F1 are still in fact quite cutting edge tech. I too prefer performance over all, but I do know there can exist a happy medium whereby an engine can feature more recent technologies whilst still offering a more significant sound signature that communicates it's ferocity. As an RC racer throughout most of my life, I know first hand how modern electronics and battery technology have jumped into the 22nd century, in the last 10 years, but as this is MOTOR Sport, I prefer it be powered by, well, motors.

Formula-E is the most suitable platform/league for exhibiting the latest in electric technology and with F1 featuring advanced electronics it doesn't allow the technology in Formula-E, as well as the series itself, to promote itself as widely is it perhaps could/should be, further solidifying Fe as a strong series/brand. While I dislike the swapping of cars instead of the entire battery array, Fe is truly an astonishingly phenomenal display of technology, showing what is possible in terms of power and speed without the use of fossil fuels. But they sound like overgrown RC cars. LOL

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
See, this is where EVERYONE here could go to a track and go into the garages of different types of cars/engines just to hear them rev, and I can say with 1,000,000% certainty that the ones that would leave everyone in awe and make every one feel excited would be the ones that make them feel their ferocity in their bones. Why do I know this? Because I've done this very thing for both 4-wheels and 2-wheels. Been there for Nascar, CART/ChampCar, F1, MotoGP, AMA, and Superbikes. And I went to so many Miami Grand Prix when it was held in bayfront park in the streets of downtown Miami and there you got to hear just about every engine type all in one race, not to mention over the entire weekend.

No, you can't. You can say with whatever absurd certainty you want that you and people like you would feel that way. I know people who hate the feeling of vibration in their bones from sound, so how likely are they to love those engines? Not at all.

There are people who love a rock concert with the volume at ~120 dB. There are people who hate it, and would prefer to listen to the same music quietly on their headphones. Not everyone is like you: deal with it.

And those people are likely not racing fans, so I fully understand them not caring for louder engines, so I don't factor them into my assessment of the situation.

Not everyone has this unbreakable mental connection between racing and painfully loud engines. Yes, one of the two is a racing fan.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:38 pm
Posts: 267
Herb Tarlik wrote:
RaggedMan wrote:

We associate loud engines with performance because of past experience but it's no longer the case. It's time to accept the paradigm shift and realize that the future of high performance will cease to be about how much power can be squeezed out of an ounce of fossil fuel and more about how much performance they can get out of a kwHr of battery. It's not going to be loud but it will still be high performance and that's what I care about.


You, and the 6 other people, can watch Formula E and fantasize all you want about battery life.


Exactly. If left to their own devices, engineers will gravitate to complexity. I dare you to take a look at your phone, washer, TV or even a simple light bulb and tell me no.

Where will it end? Fuel Cells, Steam, Bunnies on a flaming treadmill? There is room for other Formulae but F1 should be left as it was made. In fact, the current formula is such a kludge that more regulations were needed to fix the unintended consequences of the previous changes. Case in point, cost control.

Like Brundle said, the formula should be WAY more open in terms of the motor they put in the car and less like a spec series where there are only 3 permissible modes of transport. Ferrari, Merc or Renny.

Must have 4 wheels, must meet all safety standards must be no bigger than this and no smaller than that...Done. You can run it on U-238 if you want.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1550
Location: Miami, Florida
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
See, this is where EVERYONE here could go to a track and go into the garages of different types of cars/engines just to hear them rev, and I can say with 1,000,000% certainty that the ones that would leave everyone in awe and make every one feel excited would be the ones that make them feel their ferocity in their bones. Why do I know this? Because I've done this very thing for both 4-wheels and 2-wheels. Been there for Nascar, CART/ChampCar, F1, MotoGP, AMA, and Superbikes. And I went to so many Miami Grand Prix when it was held in bayfront park in the streets of downtown Miami and there you got to hear just about every engine type all in one race, not to mention over the entire weekend.

No, you can't. You can say with whatever absurd certainty you want that you and people like you would feel that way. I know people who hate the feeling of vibration in their bones from sound, so how likely are they to love those engines? Not at all.

There are people who love a rock concert with the volume at ~120 dB. There are people who hate it, and would prefer to listen to the same music quietly on their headphones. Not everyone is like you: deal with it.

And those people are likely not racing fans, so I fully understand them not caring for louder engines, so I don't factor them into my assessment of the situation.

Not everyone has this unbreakable mental connection between racing and painfully loud engines. Yes, one of the two is a racing fan.

To you and everyone whining about loud noise, buy a pair of these and get on with it.

https://www.opticsplanet.com/walkers-ra ... -muff.html

The FIA made it a priority to raise the decibel levels as a solution and there's only one reason to seek solutions, and it's not for kicks and giggles.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 1:00 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Paris
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
See, this is where EVERYONE here could go to a track and go into the garages of different types of cars/engines just to hear them rev, and I can say with 1,000,000% certainty that the ones that would leave everyone in awe and make every one feel excited would be the ones that make them feel their ferocity in their bones. Why do I know this? Because I've done this very thing for both 4-wheels and 2-wheels. Been there for Nascar, CART/ChampCar, F1, MotoGP, AMA, and Superbikes. And I went to so many Miami Grand Prix when it was held in bayfront park in the streets of downtown Miami and there you got to hear just about every engine type all in one race, not to mention over the entire weekend.

No, you can't. You can say with whatever absurd certainty you want that you and people like you would feel that way. I know people who hate the feeling of vibration in their bones from sound, so how likely are they to love those engines? Not at all.

There are people who love a rock concert with the volume at ~120 dB. There are people who hate it, and would prefer to listen to the same music quietly on their headphones. Not everyone is like you: deal with it.

And those people are likely not racing fans, so I fully understand them not caring for louder engines, so I don't factor them into my assessment of the situation.

Not everyone has this unbreakable mental connection between racing and painfully loud engines. Yes, one of the two is a racing fan.

To you and everyone whining about loud noise, buy a pair of these and get on with it.

https://www.opticsplanet.com/walkers-ra ... -muff.html

The FIA made it a priority to raise the decibel levels as a solution and there's only one reason to seek solutions, and it's not for kicks and giggles.


See, this is why we cannot take seriously your posts.

_________________
« Violent delights have violent ends »


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 4506
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
See, this is where EVERYONE here could go to a track and go into the garages of different types of cars/engines just to hear them rev, and I can say with 1,000,000% certainty that the ones that would leave everyone in awe and make every one feel excited would be the ones that make them feel their ferocity in their bones. Why do I know this? Because I've done this very thing for both 4-wheels and 2-wheels. Been there for Nascar, CART/ChampCar, F1, MotoGP, AMA, and Superbikes. And I went to so many Miami Grand Prix when it was held in bayfront park in the streets of downtown Miami and there you got to hear just about every engine type all in one race, not to mention over the entire weekend.

No, you can't. You can say with whatever absurd certainty you want that you and people like you would feel that way. I know people who hate the feeling of vibration in their bones from sound, so how likely are they to love those engines? Not at all.

There are people who love a rock concert with the volume at ~120 dB. There are people who hate it, and would prefer to listen to the same music quietly on their headphones. Not everyone is like you: deal with it.

And those people are likely not racing fans, so I fully understand them not caring for louder engines, so I don't factor them into my assessment of the situation.

Not everyone has this unbreakable mental connection between racing and painfully loud engines. Yes, one of the two is a racing fan.

To you and everyone whining about loud noise, buy a pair of these and get on with it.

https://www.opticsplanet.com/walkers-ra ... -muff.html

The FIA made it a priority to raise the decibel levels as a solution and there's only one reason to seek solutions, and it's not for kicks and giggles.

To you and everyone whining about not enough noise, buy a couple of these and get on with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear_trumpet

You act as if people were complaining about too much noise before and the regulations were changed to cater to that when that is far from the case.

_________________
{Insert clever sig line here}


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3009
LBET wrote:
Must have 4 wheels, must meet all safety standards must be no bigger than this and no smaller than that...Done. You can run it on U-238 if you want.

If the engine regs were truly unrestricted then you would have even quieter engines.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20902
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
LBET wrote:
Must have 4 wheels, must meet all safety standards must be no bigger than this and no smaller than that...Done. You can run it on U-238 if you want.

If the engine regs were truly unrestricted then you would have even quieter engines.

not necessarily. If the regs were unrestricted we'd have a variety of different solutions. When you get down to it, if the regs had been open it's highly unlikely these hybrids would even have existed. It needed the regs to mandate them for them to ,make sporting sense


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3009
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
LBET wrote:
Must have 4 wheels, must meet all safety standards must be no bigger than this and no smaller than that...Done. You can run it on U-238 if you want.

If the engine regs were truly unrestricted then you would have even quieter engines.

not necessarily. If the regs were unrestricted we'd have a variety of different solutions. When you get down to it, if the regs had been open it's highly unlikely these hybrids would even have existed. It needed the regs to mandate them for them to ,make sporting sense

You would see cars with highly sophisticated MGU-Hs, with no reduced fuel flow rate for lower RPMs and unrestricted MGU-Ks.

MGU-Hs were not allowed on the 2.4L V8s.

MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

If the manufacturers had been allowed MGU-Hs on the V8s, or the V10s then they would have. In fact, even back in 1988 the turbo engines were smoking the naturally aspirated ones and that was without an MGU attached, just incredibly advanced (for the time) onboard supercomputers. Turbo engines had to be restricted and then banned before naturally aspirated engines became the engine of choice. Actually scratch that, there wasn't a choice. High revving naturally aspirated engines were the engine of no-choice.

Noise is wasted energy and racing is all amount using as much of the energy that you can for speed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
The FIA made it a priority to raise the decibel levels as a solution and there's only one reason to seek solutions, and it's not for kicks and giggles.

Sure, because a vocal minority did what a vocal minority does best: convince people they're not a minority at all. It's the same reason we have an orange turd in the White House now instead of a real leader.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20902
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
LBET wrote:
Must have 4 wheels, must meet all safety standards must be no bigger than this and no smaller than that...Done. You can run it on U-238 if you want.

If the engine regs were truly unrestricted then you would have even quieter engines.

not necessarily. If the regs were unrestricted we'd have a variety of different solutions. When you get down to it, if the regs had been open it's highly unlikely these hybrids would even have existed. It needed the regs to mandate them for them to ,make sporting sense

You would see cars with highly sophisticated MGU-Hs, with no reduced fuel flow rate for lower RPMs and unrestricted MGU-Ks.

MGU-Hs were not allowed on the 2.4L V8s.

MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

If the manufacturers had been allowed MGU-Hs on the V8s, or the V10s then they would have. In fact, even back in 1988 the turbo engines were smoking the naturally aspirated ones and that was without an MGU attached, just incredibly advanced (for the time) onboard supercomputers. Turbo engines had to be restricted and then banned before naturally aspirated engines became the engine of choice. Actually scratch that, there wasn't a choice. High revving naturally aspirated engines were the engine of no-choice.

Noise is wasted energy and racing is all amount using as much of the energy that you can for speed.

I'm not convinced we would have an MGU-H at all. They were brought in by the regulations, not as a result of engineering ingenuity, weren't they?

My point is simply that there are any number of ways manufacturers could have gone with unrestricted engines. I doubt anyone would have chosen the high risk and high cost solution we have now, unless the rules forced them to. We'd probably have (twin) turbos or some such, rather than untried and untested technology


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9674
Location: Ireland
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

Wait then why is there a limit in the amount of MGU-H components you can use in a season? If it's not mandatory then why should the FIA care how many one car uses?

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3009
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
LBET wrote:
Must have 4 wheels, must meet all safety standards must be no bigger than this and no smaller than that...Done. You can run it on U-238 if you want.

If the engine regs were truly unrestricted then you would have even quieter engines.

not necessarily. If the regs were unrestricted we'd have a variety of different solutions. When you get down to it, if the regs had been open it's highly unlikely these hybrids would even have existed. It needed the regs to mandate them for them to ,make sporting sense

You would see cars with highly sophisticated MGU-Hs, with no reduced fuel flow rate for lower RPMs and unrestricted MGU-Ks.

MGU-Hs were not allowed on the 2.4L V8s.

MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

If the manufacturers had been allowed MGU-Hs on the V8s, or the V10s then they would have. In fact, even back in 1988 the turbo engines were smoking the naturally aspirated ones and that was without an MGU attached, just incredibly advanced (for the time) onboard supercomputers. Turbo engines had to be restricted and then banned before naturally aspirated engines became the engine of choice. Actually scratch that, there wasn't a choice. High revving naturally aspirated engines were the engine of no-choice.

Noise is wasted energy and racing is all amount using as much of the energy that you can for speed.

I'm not convinced we would have an MGU-H at all. They were brought in by the regulations, not as a result of engineering ingenuity, weren't they?

My point is simply that there are any number of ways manufacturers could have gone with unrestricted engines. I doubt anyone would have chosen the high risk and high cost solution we have now, unless the rules forced them to. We'd probably have (twin) turbos or some such, rather than untried and untested technology

I'm not sure I follow your logic.

The engine manufacturers could elect to not put an MGU-H on their current engines if it was a hindrance to the engine design, just put a regular turbo on it. The fact is the MGU-H makes a huge difference to the performance of the engines. We have a Mercedes engine pushing out nearly 1,000bhp now, which means if you take away the 160 coming from the KERS, the MGU-H is making that engine significantly more powerful than the 2.4 V8s.

And that's with 2/3rds of the fuel and having to do 5 races on an engine.

Why wouldn't you put an MGU-H on the 2.4 V8? Or whatever engine design you went for?

mcdo wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

Wait then why is there a limit in the amount of MGU-H components you can use in a season? If it's not mandatory then why should the FIA care how many one car uses?

How does that follow?

I mean, the manufacturers COULD design an engine without an MGU-H, but they don't because they'd be about 200 - 250bhp down.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2879
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
I'm not sure I follow your logic.

The engine manufacturers could elect to not put an MGU-H on their current engines if it was a hindrance to the engine design, just put a regular turbo on it. The fact is the MGU-H makes a huge difference to the performance of the engines. We have a Mercedes engine pushing out nearly 1,000bhp now, which means if you take away the 160 coming from the KERS, the MGU-H is making that engine significantly more powerful than the 2.4 V8s.

And that's with 2/3rds of the fuel and having to do 5 races on an engine.

Why wouldn't you put an MGU-H on the 2.4 V8? Or whatever engine design you went for?

mcdo wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

Wait then why is there a limit in the amount of MGU-H components you can use in a season? If it's not mandatory then why should the FIA care how many one car uses?

How does that follow?

I mean, the manufacturers COULD design an engine without an MGU-H, but they don't because they'd be about 200 - 250bhp down.


Sorry but what you are saying is completely new to me. From what I could gather the power unit's output basically comes from the ICE+turbo+160hp from the MGU-K. The Mgu-H is just there to harvest exhaust energy, convert it to electrical power and feed that power to the MGU-k, batteries, and spool the turbo. I've never heard that it delivers power to the driveshaft as well, which is what you are saying by referencing 200-250hp? I mean, the amount of electrical power that can be delivered to the driveshaft as per the regulations is limited to 160hp and only for 33 sec.
So what gives?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4404
Location: Michigan, USA
kleefton wrote:
Sorry but what you are saying is completely new to me. From what I could gather the power unit's output basically comes from the ICE+turbo+160hp from the MGU-K. The Mgu-H is just there to harvest exhaust energy, convert it to electrical power and feed that power to the MGU-k, batteries, and spool the turbo. I've never heard that it delivers power to the driveshaft as well, which is what you are saying by referencing 200-250hp? I mean, the amount of electrical power that can be delivered to the driveshaft as per the regulations is limited to 160hp and only for 33 sec.
So what gives?

I believe there was a loophole in the rules where the power the MGU-H can feed into the system is functionally unlimited, and it's been speculated for years that Mercedes is producing much more from it than any other team.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20902
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
If the engine regs were truly unrestricted then you would have even quieter engines.

not necessarily. If the regs were unrestricted we'd have a variety of different solutions. When you get down to it, if the regs had been open it's highly unlikely these hybrids would even have existed. It needed the regs to mandate them for them to ,make sporting sense

You would see cars with highly sophisticated MGU-Hs, with no reduced fuel flow rate for lower RPMs and unrestricted MGU-Ks.

MGU-Hs were not allowed on the 2.4L V8s.

MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

If the manufacturers had been allowed MGU-Hs on the V8s, or the V10s then they would have. In fact, even back in 1988 the turbo engines were smoking the naturally aspirated ones and that was without an MGU attached, just incredibly advanced (for the time) onboard supercomputers. Turbo engines had to be restricted and then banned before naturally aspirated engines became the engine of choice. Actually scratch that, there wasn't a choice. High revving naturally aspirated engines were the engine of no-choice.

Noise is wasted energy and racing is all amount using as much of the energy that you can for speed.

I'm not convinced we would have an MGU-H at all. They were brought in by the regulations, not as a result of engineering ingenuity, weren't they?

My point is simply that there are any number of ways manufacturers could have gone with unrestricted engines. I doubt anyone would have chosen the high risk and high cost solution we have now, unless the rules forced them to. We'd probably have (twin) turbos or some such, rather than untried and untested technology

I'm not sure I follow your logic.

The engine manufacturers could elect to not put an MGU-H on their current engines if it was a hindrance to the engine design, just put a regular turbo on it. The fact is the MGU-H makes a huge difference to the performance of the engines. We have a Mercedes engine pushing out nearly 1,000bhp now, which means if you take away the 160 coming from the KERS, the MGU-H is making that engine significantly more powerful than the 2.4 V8s.

And that's with 2/3rds of the fuel and having to do 5 races on an engine.

Why wouldn't you put an MGU-H on the 2.4 V8? Or whatever engine design you went for?

mcdo wrote:
Alienturnedhuman wrote:
MGU-Hs are not mandatory on the 1.6L V6s, but you don't see manufacturers running without them because they are the game changing element.

Wait then why is there a limit in the amount of MGU-H components you can use in a season? If it's not mandatory then why should the FIA care how many one car uses?

How does that follow?

I mean, the manufacturers COULD design an engine without an MGU-H, but they don't because they'd be about 200 - 250bhp down.

I fear we may have different starting points! I'm saying that if we'd had unrestricted regulations years ago then the likelihood is that we'd never have had the MGU-H in the first place. We only have it because the rules enforced it. We'd more likely have had simpler technologies, and the likes of e.g. Honda wouldn't have spent years just trying to make their engines get to the end of a race


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2879
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Sorry but what you are saying is completely new to me. From what I could gather the power unit's output basically comes from the ICE+turbo+160hp from the MGU-K. The Mgu-H is just there to harvest exhaust energy, convert it to electrical power and feed that power to the MGU-k, batteries, and spool the turbo. I've never heard that it delivers power to the driveshaft as well, which is what you are saying by referencing 200-250hp? I mean, the amount of electrical power that can be delivered to the driveshaft as per the regulations is limited to 160hp and only for 33 sec.
So what gives?

I believe there was a loophole in the rules where the power the MGU-H can feed into the system is functionally unlimited, and it's been speculated for years that Mercedes is producing much more from it than any other team.


It may be unlimited as far as the time they can use it, maybe much longer than the supposed 33 sec, but it is still only 160hp.
If you watch this Mercedes video where the guy is explaining what a derate is, he mentions the missing 160hp when there is no electrical power coming from the K. He does not mention the H. Power has always been capped at 160hp. The MGU-H does not feed power to the ICE or the wheels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCZsXQ98FCM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 216
Zoue wrote:
I fear we may have different starting points! I'm saying that if we'd had unrestricted regulations years ago then the likelihood is that we'd never have had the MGU-H in the first place. We only have it because the rules enforced it. We'd more likely have had simpler technologies, and the likes of e.g. Honda wouldn't have spent years just trying to make their engines get to the end of a race

Regulations were never unrestricted

1950–1953
Engine specs set at 1500 cc maximum size for engines with a compressor (supercharger or turbocharger) or 4500 cc for normally aspirated engines. No weight limit.

Meaning single turbo never in the history of F1 has the suggested twin turbo solution that was suggested been allowed.

I'd guess these regs wouldn't allow the mgu k to power the driveshaft but the way the teams manage to get around grey areas in the rules they may even have been able to sneak the mgu k through as I doubt they were written in a way that this couldn't be done.

I'd have thought the mgu h would have been allowed in these rules (though may be wrong) even if the mgu k wasn't as it could be used to spool up the turbo for better range and less lag...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20902
dompclarke wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I fear we may have different starting points! I'm saying that if we'd had unrestricted regulations years ago then the likelihood is that we'd never have had the MGU-H in the first place. We only have it because the rules enforced it. We'd more likely have had simpler technologies, and the likes of e.g. Honda wouldn't have spent years just trying to make their engines get to the end of a race

Regulations were never unrestricted

1950–1953
Engine specs set at 1500 cc maximum size for engines with a compressor (supercharger or turbocharger) or 4500 cc for normally aspirated engines. No weight limit.

Meaning single turbo never in the history of F1 has the suggested twin turbo solution that was suggested been allowed.

I'd guess these regs wouldn't allow the mgu k to power the driveshaft but the way the teams manage to get around grey areas in the rules they may even have been able to sneak the mgu k through as I doubt they were written in a way that this couldn't be done.

I'd have thought the mgu h would have been allowed in these rules (though may be wrong) even if the mgu k wasn't as it could be used to spool up the turbo for better range and less lag...

regulations never mandated a specific, untried technology before, either. Point is that the MGU-H is a direct product of FIA intervention: it's highly doubtful we'd have it as a result of natural evolution. Not yet, anyway, as not everyone is getting them right even though they are forced down that path.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Quick engine poll
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 216
Zoue wrote:
dompclarke wrote:
Zoue wrote:
I fear we may have different starting points! I'm saying that if we'd had unrestricted regulations years ago then the likelihood is that we'd never have had the MGU-H in the first place. We only have it because the rules enforced it. We'd more likely have had simpler technologies, and the likes of e.g. Honda wouldn't have spent years just trying to make their engines get to the end of a race

Regulations were never unrestricted

1950–1953
Engine specs set at 1500 cc maximum size for engines with a compressor (supercharger or turbocharger) or 4500 cc for normally aspirated engines. No weight limit.

Meaning single turbo never in the history of F1 has the suggested twin turbo solution that was suggested been allowed.

I'd guess these regs wouldn't allow the mgu k to power the driveshaft but the way the teams manage to get around grey areas in the rules they may even have been able to sneak the mgu k through as I doubt they were written in a way that this couldn't be done.

I'd have thought the mgu h would have been allowed in these rules (though may be wrong) even if the mgu k wasn't as it could be used to spool up the turbo for better range and less lag...

regulations never mandated a specific, untried technology before, either. Point is that the MGU-H is a direct product of FIA intervention: it's highly doubtful we'd have it as a result of natural evolution. Not yet, anyway, as not everyone is getting them right even though they are forced down that path.

As someone said before it's not mandated to have it, they don't have to

*Edit* like when kers was first allowed not all teams ran it while they got it sorted or decided that it was worth diverting the money from another part of their car design


Last edited by dompclarke on Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:21 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group