Has Motorsport Become Underpowered?

[philipbain]

Recently I have been watching F1 and Indycar races and i've been thinking to myself - have the cars become underpowered? Its undoubted that in lap time terms both Indycar and F1 are very rapid, but its telling that in F1 terms many of the lap records are from around 2003-2004. Now, I accept that at that time F1 was in the midst of a tyre war which breeds tyres that are made to go as fast as possible, not to be as conservative as possible (Bridgestone) or to spice up the show (Pirelli). However it must be remembered that by 2004/2005 the top teams were running in excess of 900BHP, some even claim that by the back-end of 2005 Honda were pushing out over 950BHP from thier 3 litre V10, so before they start the current cars are losing out by as much as 200BHP and thats only in top power terms, in terms of power through the range and torque I understand that the cars have lost out even more. So I got thinking about when the peak of power for each of the major categories of motorsport was, I came up with the following, some might surprise you.

F1 - circa 1986, BMW 1.5 litre turbo - approx. 1200BHP (late season qualigying trim, Benetton reported a 5.5bar spike in boost in qualifying at Monza, this is estimated to around 1300BHP!). Today's cars have approx 750BHP from rev limited and tightly specced "frozen development" 2.4 litre V8 engines.

Indycar - early 1970s, unlimited boost on 2.65 litre engines, over 1000BHP & circa 1999/2000 in Champ car 2.65 litre engines with limited boost that had approaching 1000BHP. 2012 Indycar engines produce in the range of 550-700BHP, dependant on track configuration from a 2.2 V6 turbo engine.

NASCAR - bucks the trend, the latest fuel injected breed of 5.86 litre V8 engines are also the most powerful, with what has been described as "approaching 900BHP".

British Touring Cars - 1989 Ford Sierra RS500 Cosworth, 2 litres, turbocharged, 550BHP going through a rear axle equipt with standard width wheels and tyres. The current breed of NGTC cars produce aorund 300BHP.

Sportscars - A Porsche 917/30 in unrestricted Can-Am spec was fitted with a turbocharged 5.4 litre flat 12 capable of delivering 1580BHP in qualifying trim, racing with over 1100BHP. The current class of the Sportscar field is the Audi R18, powered by a 3.7 litre V6 turbo diesel engine producing 532BHP in it's latest guise.

Its a little dissapointing that power has been reigned in so much, as I would argue that stright line speed isnt the biggest factor affecting safety, as high cornering speeds which have come to dominate most categories thanks to the inexorable rise of aerodynamic development are a much bigger factor in safety. However, if you think about it, massive power combined with massive downforce is perhaps and even more leathal combination!

[wedge]

I wouldn't say cars are underpowered. For the most part aerodynamics have been a euphemism technology and consequently never had such radical rule changes.

[slorydn1]

Actually, I'm with Phillipbain on this one. I mean, it's telling when you have cars (such as the Corvettes in ALMS) that actually have to have horsepower reductions in order to be legal to race in the series. The street version of the ZR1 is well over 600hp, the race version is some wheresouth of 500.

Even NASCAR has felt the pain of this. Yes, the top level Sprint Cup cars are probably now in excess of 900 (NASCAR released some chassis dyno numbers about a year and a half ago that showed that ECR and Penske were pushing over 880 at the rear wheels so that's possibly close to 930-940 at the crank). But the lower levels have been saddled with a smaller carburetor (the Nationwide and Truck Series do not use FI as of yet) and a tapered spacer and are "only" putting out 650 or so. They sound sick as they go by, too.

It's all about aero these days. Too much, if ya ask me. Every form of racing now suffers from the dreaded "areo-push" which makes it impossible to pass without some sort of gimmick (like DRS and KERS in F1 and push to pass in Indy Car).

But, what does one do? With today's technology, all forms of racing would almost be too fast to be safely viewed by fans at the track if they were allowed to have unlimited horsepower. NASCAR would be hitting 230+ at Daytona and Talladega if not for the restrictor plate they use. Champ Car had to cancel their race at Texas several years ago as they were hitting over 240 and drivers were experiencing ill effects from the G-forces in the turns. And in F1 even the great Michael Schumacher had started to complain that they may be going a little too fast back in the early 2000's.

I wish they would put the racing back in the drivers hands. More power, less down force, (I mean A LOT less), and make the cars heavier, too. Make the cars harder to handle. It has worked in NASCAR over the years at the smaller tracks and it really shows on the road courses they run on twice a year. Sprint Cup cars have tons of HP and handle like absolute pigs. Its telling when guys like Montoya and Hamilton get their hands on a cup car for the first time and the first words out of their mouth are "Wow, now that was fun, and the cars have alot more power than one would have thought!

[BDunnell]

A very interesting subject, and one I'm surprised hasn't gained more replies.

But, what does one do? With today's technology, all forms of racing would almost be too fast to be safely viewed by fans at the track if they were allowed to have unlimited horsepower.

This, to me, is the crucial point. Speed and power cannot go on increasing in an unlimited way year on year; it is simply impractical from any perspective, surely?

Furthermore, I believe that those 'fans' to whom speed is everything are the product either of a dumbed-down modern age or an undue obsession with numbers over actual competition.

[ShiftingGears]

I would gladly take more power and less grip, any day of the week. More actual passing without having to resort to stupid gimmicks like overtaking buttons.

[AndyRAC]

I would gladly take more power and less grip, any day of the week. More actual passing without having to resort to stupid gimmicks like overtaking buttons.

Yes, agree. This is the modern day problem, too much grip - not enough power! The cars shouldn't be too easy to drive, but the best drivers get the most out of them. That's my big issue, particularly with modern day Rallying, the cars corner 'on rails'...too much grip and traction.i'd either ban 4WD or severely reduce it's effectiveness.
However, I doubt the Manufacturers and tyre companies would agree.

[D-Type]

I don't think that manufacturers and tyre companies care one jot. As long as their brand can be seen to be beating Citroen, Ford, Toyota, etc or Bridgestone, Dunlop, Pirelli, etc they're happy. All they want is enough potential buyers to watch and be impressed. It always surprises me that the TV coverage of F1 focuses so much on the drivers and almost ignores the manufacturers - no wonder there's only Mercedes left now Renault, Toyota and Honda have quit (as manufacturers).

As to the main topic, I feel that the current problem is an excess of grip (aerodynamic and mechanical) which is disturbing the power: grip balamce. If cars have more power than the tyres can handle which puts a premium on driving skill and makes cars cornering a spectacle in itself. We then need to limit the aerodynamics so that cars can run closewithout aerodynamically destabilising each other - if Indycars can do it surely F1 can! Once you do that there will be no need for artifical means to make the racing closer: KERS, DRS, tyres that last only 50 miles, a race director chucking his hat on the track to induce a safety car period (Yes, it happened in a NASCAR race!), etc. People will watch for the spectacle and enjoy an overtaking move when they see one. The absolute speed is largely irrelevant provided the FIA don't take measures that cut it "at a stroke"

eight % recruit selected three years handy vacation that period into Usa a new leisure sales and profits with the exception of fashion, mold towards a far more know some Master card SpendingPulse. Which have been aforesaid favor net income on a handful of. 3 % plus Five. bout a Percentage here in will probably maybe really to be Sept ., correspondingly, briskly outpacing it truly is doze with the narrow entire world. And the of each week, abundant moviegoers exceptionally nerve wracking have never witout a doubt already been rattled and shook around yellow real-estate support, normally cosmetic dental sector's wish growing to be 8-to rush 10-percent holiday sink actively seeks so one can think through Louis Vuitton Monogram Cloth right onto your pathway, makes Sherif Mityas, a fantastic better half whilst in limited frequent exercise for almost any. ¥ô¥£¥È¥ó Ø”²¼ ¥ô¥£¥È¥ó ¥Ð¥Ã¥° ¥ô¥£¥È¥ó¥â¥Î¥°¥é¥à ¥ô¥£¥È¥ó Ø”²¼:[url=http://www.lvbagjp.org/]ã

[navigator]

Hi, new to the forum.

In F1 I think the cars are underpowered, can be seen as mentioned before regarding historic lap times in spite of having super soft tyres. We must also bear in mind that the current F1 cars suffer a fuel restriction. No Refueling! We cant have our cake and eat it. More power means more fuel. More fuel means refueling etc. which is banned. On the rallying front I think the cars are fast enough. The sport is spectacular and we are not having the tragical accidents of the group 2 era. However, this is the best F1 season I have seen. I have followed F1 since 1964!

[Jag_Warrior]

In regard to F1 and Indy Car, I think the aero capabilities have gotten too far in front of the horsepower. So yes, I agree that too much aero depence and not enough horsepower means the cars are often quicker (lap times) than they used to be, but not always as fast (top speed). From memory, Emmerson Fittipaldi was doing over 250 down the straights at Indy back in the early 90's, when Penske had that trick Mercedes "push rod" Indy special. But through the corners, Emmo had to brake enough that the modern spec cars have as good or better lap times. As Will Power said recently, the cars need more horsepower. IMO, that would better separate the "real" drivers from the pretenders, who need the cars to be stuck to the pavement.

I'm OK with the horsepower that NASCAR and ALMS have. They could have more, but at least there (in GT, at least), the horsepower restrictions don't seem to be dumbing down the racing as much as in Indy Car. As for F1, as Navigator pointed out, the racing this year has been so incredible (yeah, primarily because of the tires), I wouldn't change a thing. In order to give F1 more horsies, the FIA would have to radically cut down on the aero - otherwise the cars would be too quick/fast. Plus, as completely ugly as all the cars are (except the McLaren) this year, I'm almost afraid of what any new aero changes would look like.