They had 950 HP in 600 Kg cars in the early 00's and the track and tires could take it. The problem with the hybrid era is that the cars are now 800 KG with 1000 HP. It is the weight that is killing the tires {that and the downforce} Downforce to be less than 2× the weight of the car at that instant. Length, width, height, weight. Oh and bring back the tire wars.[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE] I gave power and downforce figures as indications only. Weight should be free, IMO. Up to the designers to choose solutions to minimise it.
I gave power and downforce figures as indications only. Weight should be free, IMO. Up to the designers to choose solutions to minimise it.[/QUOTE] Weight can only be free if/when it is accompanied by a rule stating "if the driver is hurt in that car, that team looses a defined number of points". Here in the hybrid era, we could allow teams to take weight off the car be removing elements of the hybrid system itself. On certain circuits (Monza) removal of the battery would still allow MguH to feed MguK not lessening top speed.
It goes without saying that I am in favour of keeping the mandatory chassis test that already exists. There should be no compromise on drivers safety. I would like F1 to progress, not go backward.
They should go ahead. With the tech we have these days, i'm really sure the V10s can be properly developed and be fuel saving, reliable, and easier to produce and run compared to the noiseless crap we have these days.
I like all the conversation here. There was once a "box" that the car would fit into, and it was legal, Ride height, length, width, etc... I think like William noted, give outside parameters: 1000BHP, no more than 3G lateral, axial, or combo of Gs on the driver. Stock pump fuel, open engine regs, max downforce limit. If you have a design for a car with 30 wheels, have at it.
By "nobody" you're meaning big manufacturers. Cosworth is still making V12's and V16's. Ferrari still making V12's in their production cars.
If (big if) sustainable fuels become a viable alternative to EVs in the eyes of regulators (let's pray), I'm sure we will see a renaissance of V12 powered supercars. Their endangered status will only make enthusiasts miss them more. Regardless, a huge contingent of fans - I'd bet an overwhelming majority - want those engines back. It's irrelevant to them whether manufacturers produce them for the road. They just want that amazing scream again. If the manufacturers aren't interested, it wouldn't bother me in the least to see them go. I think the sport would be better without them. Not that that's going to happen.
Sure, they want them, but manufacturers aren't going to sign up to build them if there's no engineering relevance to their companies. Just this year we have new v12s from Aston, Lambo and Ferrari (along with a bonkers v16 from Bugatti), so the renaissance has already started. No v10s, though.
Historical luxury brands have an image to maintain and play with nostalgia among some of their customers and keep V12 in their range, but the majority of their production is V6 and V8 turbo. From a purely efficiency point of view, a multi cylinder NA engine (V0 or V12) is an heresy with all the new technologies that have appeared in the last 2 decades. Going back to them in F1 would be throwing away $Billions of R&D; no wonder the big manufacturers are not hot on the idea ! Imagine going back to steam engine on the railroad, or prop engines in commercial aviation !!!
You're making a good case for the manufacturers to leave F1. Won't happen, but the sport would be better for it. Railroads and planes and commuter cars are utilitarian. Efficiency is a sensible goal for these applications. Racing and sportscars are entertainment. Personally, I don't find efficiency particularly entertaining. This isn't about nostalgia. Screaming V10s were exciting then and will be exciting twenty years from now. They give you goose bumps as you hear them approach. This current formula...not so much.
Ah, forgot about the BMW V10. You're right. Did Toyota produce a V10 road car other than the LFA? I believe the LFA was launched several years after Toyota had left F1 and well after the end of the F1 V10 era.
If the wind tunnel test are as scarce (access and time constraints) and expensive as we hear, why not dictate a "spec" front and rear wing. This might also be less sensitive to driving behind your competitor and allow for more overtaking. And no more DRS. Might as well radio the leading car: "Faster car coming, please lift off for 1 sec." With an orange light to signal the faster car that you lift off... (ok, I am sarcastic) What was the topic? Oh, V10 engines or MBS making sense.
The development of the car began as early as 2000. A first version of the LF-A (note the hyphen!) was presented in 2005, at a time when Toyota was still actively involved in Formula 1. Several versions were showcased (including a roadster) before the car finally went into production at the end of 2010 (!). Only 500 units were ever produced. By the end of 2009, Toyota had already withdrawn from Formula 1 with immediate effect.
William, with all due respect, the upper echelon of motorsport is: 1) WEC 2) FE (Formula E) 3) F1 F1 is trying to go between ICE and electrical with the current turbo-hybrid formula. Now, since this formula(turbo-hybrid) is not really relevant in production vehicles and it's too costly, F1 is eliminating the turbo and MGU-H and going back to a more "civilized" formula. Even Sebastian Vettel said there is no use of the turbo-hybrid formula in production cars. Yes, it brought thermal efficiency to just a little over 50% but again it has no use in mass production. The Toyota Prius has been around for 20years and that platform hasn't taken off since nor has it been derived into larger hybrid platforms from Toyota. Now, you have hydrogen platforms in their infancy and biofuels or E-fuels to combat the all-electric vehicle. Choice from the customer and the purpose of that choice to use the vehicle will drive the market. Governments should not determine what that choice is as Governments have a preconceived notion that "WE are right, the customer is wrong." This same preconceived notion is in F1 manufacturers that "WE are right, and the customer is wrong.....since we produce the market." This is entertainment and yes F1 is a "test tube" for what the up-and-coming-save-the-planet vehicle should be. The turbo-hybrid formula was a flop from an entertainment perspective and mass application perspective but was efficient from an R&D perspective. The ATMO/ICE platform is efficient in all environments from a mass perspective-->hot, cold, tropical, desert and water(diesel). That's my 2 cents.
