No need to leave, Ferrari could have vetoed the hybrid rules if they wanted; but they didn't. Probably because they were very interested and knew they needed to learn about that technology. The proof if that they have hybrid cars on their catalogue now.
Sure, but I won't be buying one their hybrids despite the mathematical stats. The world's most valuable Ferrari has a slender 300bhp ICE engine, and for good reason. Looks and sounds exquisite.
Ferrari, like any other car maker, has to abide by the legislation and only hybrid cars will meet the carbon emission limits soon. So your comment about "Ferrari not being interested in developing hybrids" is only your short-sighted opinion.
Well there are many, and I am not an expert. However on the GTLMs they measure the balance of power in a number of ways. One of the ways is using beacons I believe or essentially a split time in sectors. A big part of racing in GTLM is passing slower cars and negotiating the LMP cars. Other manufacturers believe that Porsche developed some kind of system to allow an “overboost” between beacons. The system was smart or somehow guided so that either it or the driver knew when to disable it so that when passing the second beacon the total time in the zone would be correct for bop. In reality what they created was a special overtake system which could be used in all sorts of strategic ways. I don’t know if any of this was ever formally charged either. I understand other teams reverse engineered it. Porsche just left IMSA GTLM for 21. Not sure if related.
Thanks, I wasn't aware of that system. The Porsche engines are atmospheric though, so how can they use "overboost" ? I thought you were talking about the way Porsche switched the engine location on the 911 GTLM. Turning the engine around the axle transformed the chassis dynamics, and allowed Porsche to use a larger diffuser. This was, apparently, done with the blessing of IMSA and the ACO and the approval of other constructors. This proves that a constructor can literally drive horses and carriage through regulations if his participation is valued by organisers.
I’m using the term clumsily, but the idea is to give more power. Whether they advance timing, lean it out, etc. Yah that is the political part you mention secondly. BMW has been very persuasive in the past w IMSA as well. Like look at the hardtop z4 GTLM. That GTLM car was based on a road car that never existed. Lol.
As you mention short-sightedness, two things worth noting Legislation is political, which changes all the time. The EU is falling apart and emissions legislation may well change again driven by the needs of independent countries. For high days and dry days, future repair costs on complex Ferrari hybrids will be extremely expensive and likely lead to heavy depreciation. The F154CD unit and others are more than enough fun for the street.
In my opinion Hybrid vehicles have got to go down as one of the biggest cons of the 21st century, comparing like for like cars its estimated by most that the payback period of these vehicles is around 5 - 10 years (supercars is possibly much more) and in that time the car will have depreciated substantially and cost much more in maintenance so the payback period may be much greater. By that time the car is possibly only fit for the scrapyard. How many classic car hybrid cars will there be in 40 years time? None is my guess If we then talk about "will they save the planet" again in my opinion they will not given the additional raw materials needed to produce them, the additional maintenance and potential issues for things to go badly wrong. The more complicated it is the more to go wrong! To save the planet governments across the world will need to essentially tax the car off the road, the dilemma is reduced manufacturing, infrastructure etc and the mass unemployment that would follow. Its worth noting that future EU plans (Galileo) are possibly being geared to charge motorists pay per mile through modern satellite navigation systems in order to reduce the ever increasing emissions. Do we need to reduce emissions - yes, quite how we do it would be unpalatable for most of us! Tony
The auto industry works in a global market, and the main constructors don't make cars for specific countries. Most industrialised countries have accepted to reduce carbon emission to zero in future, that we like it or not. Even in case of EU failure, that commitment won't go away, certainly not when the largest developing market (China) is on board. Ferrari will be going with the flow, and adopt any technology that secures its future.
+1 Governments are overlooking just how clean a petrol ICE is. They are VERY clean ! Meanwhile Russian and Chinese industrial chimneys are major contributors to the poisonous stuff. That's where Greta needs to focus.
Political policies constantly change. Almost on a weekly basis. Nothing is set in stone. You assume that the auto industry is controlling Governments ?
Re: China Lots of companies I deal with are cancelling contracts with China. They are steadily being ostracized.
You may take it as a lot of nonsense, but the commitment to zero carbon emission is there to stay. If anything, governments keep confirming their plans, and advancing their deadlines. The auto industry works to meet the regulations all the time to stay in business. Car makers are ditching diesel and NA engines, to adopt supercharged hybrids whilst also introducing electric cars in their range. That is a fact.
It's currently a fact ! And individual Governments can change their policies at any time, contingent on market conditions. It's also a fact that I just dumped the Panamera Hybrid as its out of town economy was hilarious. 21mpg on average
Re: China Politicians may have knee-jerk reactions to events, but the West car industry is dependent on China. - China is the fastest growing and largest market worldwide benefiting most European and US car makers. (for example in 2019 Buick sold 875 000 cars in China, 4 times more than in the USA!) - China is an important (almost essential) components supplier to the car industry in the West (cabling, wiring system, micro electric motors, micro switches, instrumentation, etc ...). - Chinese and Western car companies are inter-connected by many contracts. GM, Ford, VW, Peugeot PSA, Jaguar Land Rover, even Mercedes have factories in China in partnership with local car makers. - China has large investments in Europe, some we don't even know about. Geely owns 10% of Mercedes,+100% of Volvo, Dongfeng bailed out Peugeot PSA and has almost 15% of shares, BMW and VW have Chinese participation in their capital, etc ... I cannot see the car makers in the West cutting the branch they are sitting on. It would take a long time to disentangle the links that unite them with China.
Glad the fact you brought up diesel. They governments tried their very best to get everyone in a diesel, incentives, cheaper fuel etc (sounds familiar?). Then suddenly they decided that diesel was in fact, not so great...and everyones diesel suddenly became an expensive piece of paperweight. So yes, Governments do change their commitment. That is a fact.
At the time, reducing CO2 was the target. It was only realised later that , although diesel engines emit less CO2 than petrol ones, they give nasty particules that are just as harmful. So the diesel became the bad boy. I am not arguing about the merits of one system again another, only that adapting to new circumstances is essential. I am never one to advocate rear-guard battles; I find them pointless. If F1 goes bio fuel, fine with me. If it goes hydrogen, perfect. If it switches to electric, again that will be OK. Right now, nobody seems to know ...
All we need to do is force the shipping industry to use cleaner fuel. 1 single cruise ship emits as much particulate matter as 1 million cars, every day. There we go, I just solved the climate crisis. Where is my scouts badge? Round 2 when they start glueing themselves to the roads again (spring time, too cold now), I'll order every single cruise ship sunk. Useless floating hotels full of geriatric wife swappers anyways. They'll become artificial reefs so the fishies are happy. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Biofuel would be the best option. Electric is formula E and F1 would kill it's fanbase. Hydrogen I would like to see, 2 stroke engine should bring decent noise too...
I would have a better use for redundent cruise ships. Why not anchor them in the proximity of large town, and transform them into hotels, student accommodations, or even detention centres? They have all the facilities onboard, restaurants, shops, entertainments, swimming pools, gyms, etc ... That would save £millions to the taxpayers and solve the lack of housing.
Bringing back the noise wouldn't be clever. Noise is considered a polluant these days. When people complain enough, they bring restrictions, and can even force track closure.
The shipping industry has to abide to some rules too, and only use low-sulfur fuel to visit Western countries these days. Checks are made in harbours in Europe, but cheaper fuel is still available in Africa and Asia though.
China has that position because the West has aided it. Nike, Apple et al. But, China is no longer the cheapest place to manufacture goods. This will see an uplift in domestic production with aligned values, transparency and trust.