2014's 1.6L V6 turbos

[webberf1]

One thing I haven't been following all that closely is the finer details of next year's engine regulations.

Just a few questions for anyone who may be able to fill me in:
* Are the engines expected to be more powerful than the current V8s? How much so?
* Any word on what level of boost pressure they'll be running?
* Are they expected to have more difficult driveability than the V8s? I enjoyed how the V8s have had a peakier torque curve than the old V10s... so I'm hoping that will be even more so with the V6 turbos, and provide even more challenge for the drivers.
* What sort of RPM will they be running?
* What will they sound like? Anything similar to the 80s V6 turbos?

[dj_bytedisaster]

Not all 80s Turbo's were V6's - the BMW's were flat-4's

Considering what they squeezed out of the turbos in the 80's I'd expect them to have more oomph than the V8's.

[webberf1]

Just did a bit more searching and found a few answers to my questions. 15, 000 rpm, the FIA is expecting about 750hp. Apparently inbuilt recovery systems in the engine and exhaust will eliminate or drastically reduce turbo lag (not sure if thats a good idea). And initial reports say they sound 'good'.

[AndyL]

It'll be interesting to see and hear these new engines, I wonder if we'll see one demonstrated on track before next year's winter testing.

They are going to be a lot more heavily restricted than the old turbos though. The proposed rev limit is 15000rpm. I don't think there is a boost limit but they will have a fuel flow rate limit. They will have a longer stroke than the current engines, plus they can use the energy recovery system to drive the turbo compressor to eliminate turbo lag, so I reckon the driveability might be better than the current V8.

Most people seem to be saying the power from the new engines will be similar to the current ones when the ERS is included.

[webberf1]

It also looks (from what I'm finding) like boost pressure won't really be regulated by the FIA. But because the teams are expected to achieve a fuel flow rate of under 100kg/h it will be down to the teams to sort out their boost settings. Certainly in racing conditions that would make the kind of insane 5+ bar boost pressures seen in the 80s impossible... but perhaps that would open the door for teams to turn up the boost in qualifying? That would be cool.

[webberf1]

beat me to it andy

[AndyL]

beat me to it andy

Only partly!

[dj_bytedisaster]

Onbe shouldn't forget that Turbo technology has much advanced since the 80s. Turbo lag isn't the problem it once was to begin with. Quite frankly, I'm a bit sad that engine regulations aren't more open. I would like to see someone develop a Diesel engine and make up the less favourable characteristics with lower fuel burn, much like Audi did in LeMans. We need to get back to the early 90s, when F1 was a massive source of innovation rather than a glorified Spec series.

[webberf1]

The problem is how much can you deregulate without making the sport ridiculous? The innovations from 91-93 were well on the way towards taking a big chunk of driver skill out of the equation. And with no regs, the cars would simply be too insane. Im talking 8gs in corners, 15+ seconds faster than present, death sentence level speeds. Faster than a drivers body could even tolerate. F1 needs to be constantly receiving new regulations or else it will become farcical. And I havent even mentioned the financial burdens deregulation would impose on teams.

[airshifter]

The problem is how much can you deregulate without making the sport ridiculous? The innovations from 91-93 were well on the way towards taking a big chunk of driver skill out of the equation. And with no regs, the cars would simply be too insane. Im talking 8gs in corners, 15+ seconds faster than present, death sentence level speeds. Faster than a drivers body could even tolerate. F1 needs to be constantly receiving new regulations or else it will become farcical. And I havent even mentioned the financial burdens deregulation would impose on teams.

Agree with all the above. As much as we would like to see unlimited tech, it's just never going to happen. I suspect that if anything the new engines will be limited to right about the output of the current engines.

IIRC the qually sessions this morning had a time set that was just hundredths off the all time lap record for the track. If times go down, to some extent safety goes down. Not a good thing.

[zako85]

One thing I heard is that 2014 cars are going to suck. They will be up to 10 seconds slower per lap than the current cars. Supposedly this has to do with less fuel being allowed on cars. The rev limiter will be set at 15000 RPM but it is expected that engines will rarely see RPM this high due to fuel use concerns. Can anyone confirm this?

[Robinho]

There is not a chance in hell (even if it existed) of the cars being 10 seconds a lap slower. They will sound different, but are likely to have very similar power

Sent from North Korea using the dark network

[ShiftingGears]

The rev limit definitely takes away from the spectacle - makes passing from slipstreaming much more difficult, and then the FIA feels obliged to introduce DRS to counter that.

[webberf1]

I agree that the rev limiter is the #1 worst part of current regulations

[call_me_andrew]

At 15,000 RPM there isn't much need for those pneumatic valve springs.

[airshifter]

I don't think people are considering the effect of forced induction into the rev limit issue. Forced induction allows for much easier ways to make bigger torque numbers at lower revs. Horsepower is a result of torque and revs factored together. 750 HP is 750 HP. It really doesn't matter much at what RPM it is made at.

Combined with variable boost pressures (and I really hope they allow great freedom in this aspect) the engines could be much more exciting than the current engines. With modern day tech drivers could almost instantly up boost pressures when needed at very little expense other than fuel. This would allow for great racing.... boost + KERS to fight off DRS for example.


As for the time gaps from current cars, I fully expect the regs to be written in a way to force the cars to loose at least a few seconds a lap over current cars. They know within a year of two of development that the engineers will manage to claw back the times, and part of the reasoning in the changes is to keep safety in check.

[kfzmeister]

Of the expected 750HP, the ERS system will supply around 130HP, so engines with turbo's closer to 600HP.
Even with engine rev's limited to 15,000, the boost will make the cars tail happy, especially coming out of the corners. This alone should provide some awesome visuals during the races.
I've read that since the rear tires will be strained due to the sudden boost, there's already talk of increasing the size of the rear tires.
Another detail worth mentioning is the fact that engines allotted per driver is reduced to 6 for the year and if anything peripheral (turbo, ERS) fails, that counts as a part of the engine. :D

[zako85]

I agree that the rev limiter is the #1 worst part of current regulations

I disagree. RPM limit is one of the best (but not the only possible) equalizers. I remember F1 of the 90s, specially the first half, and it was a boring affair. Teams that did not have a Renault or Honda engine were screwed as they were at a significant disadvantage. Then Honda quit. Renault was the dominant engine from 1992 through Renault quitting F1 in the 90s while other teams had to jump through the hoops with substandard engines. Today we're having a pretty good balance among the top three engines, and anyone with money can afford a good engine installed. Granted, restricting fuel use or requiring the engine to last multiple races will make rev limits quite irrelevant. Engine map designers and drivers may _choose_ not to go anywhere near the 15000 RPM rev limit to begin with.

[AndyL]

Of the expected 750HP, the ERS system will supply around 130HP, so engines with turbo's closer to 600HP.
Even with engine rev's limited to 15,000, the boost will make the cars tail happy, especially coming out of the corners. This alone should provide some awesome visuals during the races.
I've read that since the rear tires will be strained due to the sudden boost, there's already talk of increasing the size of the rear tires.


I'm not sure it will make as much difference from this point of view as a lot of people are expecting. I think they already have a pretty flat torque curve in the small part of the rev range they actually use, and I don't see that changing with the new engines. They will still use the throttle map to control how aggressive the delivery is. While the engine will make more torque, it will probably be exactly offset by proportionally longer gearing (given that peak power is the same) so the torque delivered to the wheels would be the same as now.


Another detail worth mentioning is the fact that engines allotted per driver is reduced to 6 for the year and if anything peripheral (turbo, ERS) fails, that counts as a part of the engine. :D

That's got to be pretty alarming for some teams who have had regular KERS problems in the last few years. Does this include the battery and control unit, or just the motor/generator?

[dj_bytedisaster]

That's got to be pretty alarming for some teams who have had regular KERS problems in the last few years. Does this include the battery and control unit, or just the motor/generator?

Webbo is so ****ed :eek:

[steveaki13]

Chúc các bạn cuối tuần vui vẻ hạnh phúc.
Đừng quên tiếp tục đóng góp những bài viết hay và giá trị cho diễn đàn của chúng ta nhé.
Cảm ơn các bạn nhiều.
Trân trọng.

Wish you happy weekend.
Do not forget to continue to contribute to these articles interesting and of value to our forum offline.
Thank you very much.
Best regards.

And so... that means the Turbo Engines will work how?

[kfzmeister]

That's got to be pretty alarming for some teams who have had regular KERS problems in the last few years. Does this include the battery and control unit, or just the motor/generator?

Possibly battery pack; don't think ECU.

[Firstgear]

Does anyone know how many different engine manufacturers there will be? Will McLaren be making there own? Will Honda being supplying any teams? Any others? Or is any news out there just rumors at this point?

[AndyL]

The rumour that McLaren have not taken up their option with Mercedes for 2015 is rife, and Martin Whitmarsh did not deny it when it was put to him ("it's confidential"), but as far as I know nothing is official at this point. Honda are the obvious replacement, but that's just a strong rumour as well. I can't see McLaren getting into producing their own F1 engines, even subcontracted to Ricardo as they do with the MP4-12C. It would be a massive capital investment.

[steveaki13]

Can someone who has been reading in depth about next seasons new engines, just answer a question.

Obviously the engines are changing, but will that change the design of the cars radically? I mean will they look different?
Will the racing change?

I know not all of these questions can be answered fully, but I am just wondering how different F1 2014 is likely to be.

[webberf1]

Steveaki, according to Adrian Newey there will be little visual difference in the cars from 2013 to 2014.
Newey expects minor visual changes in '14 - GPUpdate.net (http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/294400/newey-expects-minor-visual-changes-in-14/)

[steveaki13]

Steveaki, according to Adrian Newey there will be little visual difference in the cars from 2013 to 2014.
Newey expects minor visual changes in '14 - GPUpdate.net (http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/294400/newey-expects-minor-visual-changes-in-14/)

Cheers.

[dj_bytedisaster]

Too bad - I had hoped the cars would look more like the CART machines of the late 90's :( that huge-ass airbox is just butt ugly. :s

[webberf1]

I don't mind the look of the current cars. But you're right, late 90s CART looked great. Wtf is with the Indycar monstrosities of today?

[D28]

I'm sure the new turbos can be tweaked to produce adequate horsepower, my concern is with how they will sound. F1 bills itself as being the pinnacle of motorsport, this should be assumed to include the aural element. The return to bigger multi cylinder engines of 1989 was welcomed by everyone, the turbos of that era did not produce a great sounding engine note. One of the knocks against current IndyCar units is the lack of a proper racing soundtrack.
While we can never return to the soundtrack of V12 Matra, Gurney-Weslake and Ferrari motors of the 3 litre era, it would be nice to anticipate something better than the last round of F1 turbos.

[kfzmeister]

From a German online-F1 site Motorsport-Magazin.com. One of their writers was invited to sample a new Mercedes 1.6 Turbo unit at Brixworth, where they have been running since January.

-Referred to as a "Power unit", which includes engine, turbo, ERS unit, battery pack and ECU

-turbo max 125,000rpm. engine 15,000

-maximum fuel flow for unit at 140 liters/h. Maximum fuel on board for race= 140 liters (Current 2012 max=210 liters)

-expected lap times same as current, with fuel savings of 30%. Power output same as current (750hp)

-Power units per team/ driver shrinks to 5 (currently 8). Any of the Power unit components fails, considered Power unit replacement.

-Approximate 160HP available from ERS for 33.3 seconds per lap (current 80HP for 6.7 seconds). Consider that on average 50 seconds per lap are currently full throttle! Its is very difficult to be fast without KERS in 2013. It will be nearly impossible without ERS in 2014.

-Observed sound while simulating Monza on test stand is reportedly higher in pitch, similar frequency, yet slightly less decibels. Very much a success.

-Engine/ turbo to be more of an influence in terms of performance, instead of aerodynamics.

-Engine power curve to be much broader. Cars will have much more torque available at low rpms, especially when coming out of corners where power will beat grip. Thus, the car's rear will be more nervous and will challenge the driver to put the power to the asphalt.

-Cars will be lighter at the start (less total fuel), yet slightly heavier at the end than 2013 (minimum weight has been increased slightly). This will change race and qualifying strategy.

-Finally, the design of the cars may actually change a bit. For one, the single exhaust is to exit below the rear wing. Also, it is suggested that the current design intake airbox could be eliminated altogether. Instead, a simple rollbar could be added behind driver helmet, like is being used on Indycars.

[dj_bytedisaster]

-Finally, the design of the cars may actually change a bit. For one, the single exhaust is to exit below the rear wing. Also, it is suggested that the current design intake airbox could be eliminated altogether. Instead, a simple rollbar could be added behind driver helmet, like is being used on Indycars.

Current Indycars have airboxes as they have naturally aspirated engines. I suppose you refer to pre-merger CART machinery? If that's gonna happen, I'll be a happy man - no more ugly air-scoops :D

[SGWilko]

Wtf is with the Indycar monstrosities of today?

Safety?

[zako85]

I don't mind the look of the current cars. But you're right, late 90s CART looked great. Wtf is with the Indycar monstrosities of today?

The judgement of the looks is pretty subjective. DW12 looks fine to me. Maybe I am odd. I actually liked the F1 noses from 2012.

[longisland]

The current V8s need to complete the whole season with 8 engines. Does the same apply to the new turbos? The turbo engine will reduce the RPM down to 15,000 but I suspect we there will be engine blow ups considering each engine needs to last for more than 2 races.
Another interesting point will be the power delivery. Turbo lag in general is not an issue in modern-day turbo engine; but it's likely to have more punch compare to the normally aspirated V8s. The car will be definitely more challenging to drive.
For the design team they will have their work cut out for them. Most likely the brake pads may be bigger and a harder tire compound. Maybe FIA may consider ditching the DRS and come up with tires that allow the cars to race.

[D28]

Current Indycars have airboxes as they have naturally aspirated engines. I suppose you refer to pre-merger CART machinery? If that's gonna happen, I'll be a happy man - no more ugly air-scoops :D

Looking at engine specs for 2013, all reference is to turbo engines. See my comments above as to the sound of these motors.

[Nem14]

Many of the teams may not be able to pay for engines in 2014 - Sieben Teams können neue Motoren nicht bezahlen: Rollt die Formel 1 in den Ruin? - Formel 1 - Bild.de (http://www.bild.de/sport/motorsport/formel-1/finanzielle-schieflage-bei-sieben-team-30415286.bild.html)

[zako85]

Many of the teams may not be able to pay for engines in 2014 - Sieben Teams können neue Motoren nicht bezahlen: Rollt die Formel 1 in den Ruin? - Formel 1 - Bild.de (http://www.bild.de/sport/motorsport/formel-1/finanzielle-schieflage-bei-sieben-team-30415286.bild.html)

I think high engine prices perhaps have to do with the idea of a high level of market power welded by the Formula 1 engine suppliers right now. We have now 4 engine suppliers, only 3 will be left in 2014, and 4 will be in 2015. If you were forced to by your personal vehicle from a list of only three brands, they'd probably make you pay through the nose. Once Honda is back in F1, hopefully there will be a bit more competition.

[markabilly]

The problem is how much can you deregulate without making the sport ridiculous? The innovations from 91-93 were well on the way towards taking a big chunk of driver skill out of the equation. And with no regs, the cars would simply be too insane. Im talking 8gs in corners, 15+ seconds faster than present, death sentence level speeds. Faster than a drivers body could even tolerate. F1 needs to be constantly receiving new regulations or else it will become farcical. And I havent even mentioned the financial burdens deregulation would impose on teams.

Just get rid of drivers being in the cars. :eek:
:eek:
I heard some driver quoted that said Ron Dennis was wanting to do that in the 1990's and i remember him whining about how drivers were always messing up his great engineering work :rolleyes:

BTW, I do not like the sound of turbo enginess, and prefer the old v10 or v12 scream

[D28]

BTW, I do not like the sound of turbo enginess, and prefer the old v10 or v12 scream

Amen to that. There was a thread on these blogs past, which discussed best sounding F1 engines ever. Matra V12, and various Ferrari and Honda V10s were mentioned, Special mention was given the BRM V16 supercharged unit, and so on.
I don't recall anyone nominating a turbo engine.

[odykas]

What's next.. diesel engines? :dozey:

[kfzmeister]

Everything you ever wanted to know.....

http://www.worldacademicunion.com/journal/1746-7233WJMS/wjmsvol09no02paper08.pdf

[TheFamousEccles]

Everything you ever wanted to know.....

http://www.worldacademicunion.com/journal/1746-7233WJMS/wjmsvol09no02paper08.pdf

Owww, my brain!

So, to conclude, the author considers the new tech and 1.6 litre V6 to be for naught given the resource and fuel restrictions required? Or have I grasped the wrong end of the pineapple?

[zako85]

What's next.. diesel engines? :dozey:

Diesel engines is not the next thing. It's the past thing. F1 is going in the right direction with the hybrid petrol/electric(KERS) cars with energy recovery systems. That's the way of future for the road cars IMHO.

[Mark]

Diesel engines is not the next thing. It's the past thing. F1 is going in the right direction with the hybrid petrol/electric(KERS) cars with energy recovery systems. That's the way of future for the road cars IMHO.

Traditionally F1 has been the proving ground for future road car tech, but in recent years it's drifted away from such things. I hope it can get back towards innovating in this direction.

Ultimately F1 shouldn't stay still; and shouldn't be wedded to petrol either, if electric engines end up the way that road cars go, then Formula 1 should do the same.

[schmenke]

Diesel engines is not the next thing. It's the past thing. F1 is going in the right direction with the hybrid petrol/electric(KERS) cars with energy recovery systems. That's the way of future for the road cars IMHO.

Environmentally, diesel engines is the way to go.

[Mark]

Environmentally, diesel engines is the way to go.

Not really, it's still burning oil.

[schmenke]

Not really, it's still burning oil.

It’s the lesser of two evils.

The energy input required for the distillation of diesel is less than that for petrol, and far less than that required for battery production.

The energy return on investment (i.e. potential output vs. total input) of diesel is far greater than either lead-acid or lithium-ion batteries. As well, the production of diesel is chemically more “friendly” than battery production, the latter of which results in large amounts of toxins that are difficult to dispose of. Also consider that batteries themselves don’t last forever and eventually need to be disposed of, with very little recyclable potential.

Not to mention, lithium is a non-renewable resource in limited quantities.

If we all want to “save the planet” we’d all be driving 4 (or perhaps even 3) cylinder turbo diesels.

[Mark]

If we all want to “save the planet” we’d all be driving 4 (or perhaps even 3) cylinder turbo diesels.

For road cars yes, especially since I got 85MPG this morning. But for Formula 1 I'm not sure it's relevant.

[SGWilko]

For road cars yes, especially since I got 85MPG this morning. But for Formula 1 I'm not sure it's relevant.

Is that calculated by you, or by the hugely accurate (nudge nudge wink wink) on board computer?

My S-Max reckons (since blanking off the EGR) I get 68mpg! Fag packet maths at the fuel station reveals that, actually, its 42mpg!!!

Sorry for thread drift BTW... :)

[Bagwan]

It’s the lesser of two evils.

The energy input required for the distillation of diesel is less than that for petrol, and far less than that required for battery production.

The energy return on investment (i.e. potential output vs. total input) of diesel is far greater than either lead-acid or lithium-ion batteries. As well, the production of diesel is chemically more “friendly” than battery production, the latter of which results in large amounts of toxins that are difficult to dispose of. Also consider that batteries themselves don’t last forever and eventually need to be disposed of, with very little recyclable potential.

Not to mention, lithium is a non-renewable resource in limited quantities.

If we all want to “save the planet” we’d all be driving 4 (or perhaps even 3) cylinder turbo diesels.

Said the guy from the oil patch .

You didn't mention the tailpipes .

And you didn't mention that the production of those batteries happens just the once in it's lifetime of pushing the car .

[SGWilko]

Said the guy from the oil patch .

You didn't mention the tailpipes .

And you didn't mention that the production of those batteries happens just the once in it's lifetime of pushing the car .

I'll have some of your 'lifetime' batteries please!

If batteries never expired, you'd see very few in the shops........

[dj_bytedisaster]

Agree with SGWilko here. Batteries have a relatively short lifetime, especially in comparison to a vehicle. On top of that their production is an ecological disaster. The carbon footprint of a Toyota Prius, which everyone lauds as a green mobile is sauropod-sized in comparison to that of a small diesel hatchback.

[Bagwan]

I'll have some of your 'lifetime' batteries please!

If batteries never expired, you'd see very few in the shops........

Of course you do realize that I was referring to the lifetime of the battery , with my writing , "it's" .

"It's" lifetime will have it pass the gas station many times , without a tailpipe .

[SGWilko]

Of course you do realize that I was referring to the lifetime of the battery , with my writing , "it's" .

"It's" lifetime will have it pass the gas station many times , without a tailpipe .

Fair point. But, the charge for the battery, comes from...... .......burning fossil fuels, and maybe some nuclear? None of which are renewables.

[Bagwan]

Fair point. But, the charge for the battery, comes from...... .......burning fossil fuels, and maybe some nuclear? None of which are renewables.

Of course it's a fair point . I made it . Hee hee .

Of course , you're right also , in the sense that the grid is fueled by fossils .

But , it doesn't have to be done that way .
My solar panels would charge any car up to capacity just fine .
They are guaranteed to do so for the next 25 years .

Filling that wee diesel with non-fossil fuel would go a way towards making it cleaner for the earth , but then , there's that tailpipe .

Even Formula 1 has seen the future in a world filled with tailpipes , and has started along the electric road .
And Formula E is coming .

Sure , I drive a gas machine , and I occasionally run my tractor around doing odd jobs around the property using fossil fuels , but someday , I hope to convert a car to electric , and charge it from my panels .

Getting more power from less fuel is being promoted by using smaller capacity turbocharged engines for F1 .
That's good .
Add KERS , and it pushes the advance of electric mobility , improving battery storage and energy transfer systems , and that's doubly good .

[SGWilko]

But , it doesn't have to be done that way .
My solar panels would charge any car up to capacity just fine .
They are guaranteed to do so for the next 25 years .


You, Bagwan, are the exception that really ought to be the rule IMO. A small change in planning laws could benefit all.....

[SGWilko]

and I occasionally run my tractor around doing odd jobs around the property using fossil fuels , but someday , I hope to convert a car to electric , and charge it from my panels .

Could you not run your tractor on chip fat? Is it old enough to not be bothered too much by the oil it burns?

[Bagwan]

Could you not run your tractor on chip fat? Is it old enough to not be bothered too much by the oil it burns?

As it happens , all the restaurants that have deep friers around here have already been contracted by local diesel owners , so there's none left for little old me .
I can't be too sad about that , and , as I don't use it very often , I don't suffer much guilt about that either .

I did , last year , run a few tanks of furnace oil that a friend needed to dispose of through it , so , I do try my best .

Oh , it's old enough to be perhaps called "recycled" itself .
It's an International Harvester model 444 , built somewhere between 1968 and 1972 .

[airshifter]

Of course it's a fair point . I made it . Hee hee .

Of course , you're right also , in the sense that the grid is fueled by fossils .

But , it doesn't have to be done that way .
My solar panels would charge any car up to capacity just fine .
They are guaranteed to do so for the next 25 years .

Filling that wee diesel with non-fossil fuel would go a way towards making it cleaner for the earth , but then , there's that tailpipe .

Even Formula 1 has seen the future in a world filled with tailpipes , and has started along the electric road .
And Formula E is coming .

Sure , I drive a gas machine , and I occasionally run my tractor around doing odd jobs around the property using fossil fuels , but someday , I hope to convert a car to electric , and charge it from my panels .

Getting more power from less fuel is being promoted by using smaller capacity turbocharged engines for F1 .
That's good .
Add KERS , and it pushes the advance of electric mobility , improving battery storage and energy transfer systems , and that's doubly good .

An easy solution for KERS battery charging would be to not allow the teams to charge a battery before the start. Even better yet, allow less limited use so that the teams recover more energy. If they had to power to use KERS more often, it would potentially save fuel, and thus weight, so all teams would adopt it as much as possible.

[call_me_andrew]

As it happens , all the restaurants that have deep friers around here have already been contracted by local diesel owners , so there's none left for little old me .


Have you checked with school and hospital cafeterias?

[kfzmeister]

First V6 Turbo sound captured when RB ran one in a testcar at Milton Keynes.

neue Formel 1 Motoren 2014 , Formula 1 Sound of the 2014 Engine :) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCfsxRJ0w0)

[Zico]

First V6 Turbo sound captured when RB ran one in a testcar at Milton Keynes.

neue Formel 1 Motoren 2014 , Formula 1 Sound of the 2014 Engine :) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCfsxRJ0w0)


Had me going for a second or two.. :D

[Bagwan]

Have you checked with school and hospital cafeterias?

Around these parts , schools and hospitals have gotten rid of the deep fried thing .

[Zico]

What the 2014 Renault engines will sound like.. http://www.renaultsport.com/Come-on-feel-the-noise,2630.html?lang=en


Petrol strimmer? :)

[SGWilko]

First V6 Turbo sound captured when RB ran one in a testcar at Milton Keynes.

neue Formel 1 Motoren 2014 , Formula 1 Sound of the 2014 Engine :) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCfsxRJ0w0)

Well, it can be any slower than the current engine in the Red Bull - I'd say it was a deffo step up the power ladder for them.....

[kfzmeister]

Ok, ok, here's a real clip. Looks like it was just released today.
F1 2014 Renault V6 Turbo Engine Sound Preview - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8jz_Dgb8D4)

[AndyL]

I'm still waiting for these direct-injection two-strokes I keep hearing about to go mainstream. If they had those in F1, Seb could dust off his old crazy frog impression again.

[dj_bytedisaster]

Ok, ok, here's a real clip. Looks like it was just released today.
F1 2014 Renault V6 Turbo Engine Sound Preview - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8jz_Dgb8D4)

sounds like a bloody hoover :s God that's bad ...

[call_me_andrew]

Who is the fool that said it had to be a 90 degree block?

[kfzmeister]

Who is the fool that said it had to be a 90 degree block?

"The teams’ designers came to the conclusion that 90 ̊ was the best compromise between performance and

stiffness of the engine itself." (This decision goes back some years. Iirc Renault adopted this design and won the Championship '05-'06. I believe they ran a 72 degree angle before this with Mechachrome?)

I don't get your question. :confused:

[webberf1]

It honestly doesn't sound that different to the 80s turbo engines.

That was obviously a test-bed recording, just wait til you hear it properly, on track, for final and proper judgement.

[call_me_andrew]

I think the odd-fire nature of a 90° V6 may hurt the sound quality.

Also, there was no mandated V-angle in the V10 era. Renault tried a 111° V10 in 2003 but it was too heavy and unrelaible. They reverted back to a 72° engine 2004.

90° was mandatory for the V8's, and being an even-fire engine all was well.

[sensational-senna]

How real do we think that engine is that Red Bull were testing? I can imagine curious Mercedes engineers with good ears being able to pick out characteristic of the engine just by listening.

[Zico]

How real do we think that engine is that Red Bull were testing?

This one ?

neue Formel 1 Motoren 2014 , Formula 1 Sound of the 2014 Engine :) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCfsxRJ0w0)


I'm no expert but If that is not a 2 stroke engine sound track dubbed into the video I'll run up the hill opposite my house in the buff! :D

[SGWilko]

This one ?

neue Formel 1 Motoren 2014 , Formula 1 Sound of the 2014 Engine :) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzCfsxRJ0w0)


I'm no expert but If that is not a 2 stroke engine sound track dubbed into the video I'll run up the hill opposite my house in the buff! :D

I bet it's still an improvement though on the current Renault V8...... :laugh:

[SGWilko]

How real do we think that engine is that Red Bull were testing? I can imagine curious Mercedes engineers with good ears being able to pick out characteristic of the engine just by listening.

....and Ferrari & Honda......

[zako85]

I think the odd-fire nature of a 90° V6 may hurt the sound quality.

Also, there was no mandated V-angle in the V10 era. Renault tried a 111° V10 in 2003 but it was too heavy and unrelaible. They reverted back to a 72° engine 2004.

90° was mandatory for the V8's, and being an even-fire engine all was well.

Probably the current goal is to make the engines as close to a single spec and power figures as possible. The tighter is the spec, the less chance of someone losing too much money before realizing they started with a flawed engine design, sort of like happened with Ferrari's 3.5L V12.

[joeyz_f1]

Glad F1 is becoming a "greener" sport. :)

[dj_bytedisaster]

If you are a vacuum cleaner salesman, that sound might be pleasing to one's ear, but to me it means that TPTB are continuing their mission to uglyfy F1. After properly trashing the looks of the chassis with wide front wings, narrow and tall rear wings, platypus noses and various bits and pieces everywhere, which look like someone sneezed into a bag of Lego bricks, they are now going on to insult the second of our senses by making the engines sound like a damn Vorwerk cleaner. The low rev limit is an acoustic coitus interuptus. You're waiting for the upper-revs scream ...aaaand.... a gear change. It's like finally bedding the hot chick and then shooting your ammo, while she's still peeling off the underwear. Ridiculous.

Thank god for F1 that Indycars came up with an even more hideous design, else fans would be running screaming (more high-pitched than next years engines) and watch noodle-pot races instead.

[SGWilko]

Can't say that I am fussed either way on engine sound. If the racing is good, and there is a genuine relevance to road cars and efficiency then I'm all for the new F1......

[zako85]

Who cares about engine sound man. First of all and most importantly, realize that people who get to hear the live F1 engine sound constitute single digit percentage of the overall F1 viewership. The rest really don't care because they don't get to hear almost _any_ engine sound at all. I also don't get why people are so militant about the signature 18 to 20K RPM F1 engine sound. I have been to NASCAR, V8 Supercars, and IndyCar races in recent time and they all had great engine sounds for the money I paid to attend the race. Lets put the engine sound issue to rest already.

[dj_bytedisaster]

I have been to NASCAR, V8 Supercars, and IndyCar races in recent time and they all had great engine sounds for the money I paid to attend the race. Lets put the engine sound issue to rest already.

Indycar and great engine sound are two words that don't belong in the same sentence. The engine sound is important to some of us. I don't want to watch ugly contraptions that sound like dyson's. They've stolen the looks already, now they want to steal the sound track. If I go to the track and come home without my ears bleeding, something's been wrong.

[kfzmeister]

Lets put the engine sound issue to rest already.

Yeah. Let's talk about tires again. :D

[zako85]

Actually IndyCar was a good example. I have been to an IndyCar race with the new spec V6 turbo engines, and I thought they sounded fine. Pretty damn good and loud if you ask me. The 2.2L engines are rev limited at 12,000RPM. I don't know if this is a good sample of how the 2014 F1 engines will sound, since F1 engines will have smaller displacement but a higher rev limit.

[zako85]

I did some scouting for V6 engine info in the news, and here are some interesting points that haven't been discussed yet.

First, engine development will be gradually frozen by 2018. This means that the engine manufacturers who will enter the sport after 2014 will be at a disadvantage, since they will have less time before the final development freeze. I personally think the issue is a little overblown. I am sure if at the end of 2017 the Honda engine is notably slower, special amends will be made to allow Honda to catch up, in the way the current V8 engines had been receiving updates after the freeze.

LINK: F1: FIA to 'freeze' V6 engines by 2018 ? :: PaddockTalk :: F1, Formula 1, NASCAR, IndyCar, MotoGP, ALMS, And More! (http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/story-224387.html)

Two: There will be no custom engines. At least this is what the FIA plan is right now. This means that say Red Bull and Caterham Renault engines will have to be identical. Everyone gets the "works" engine.

FIA to block custom engines for 2014 > F1 News > Grandprix.com (http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns25757.html)

Next, the energy recovery system may have to be part of the of the engine shipped by the manufacturer. This may spoil the plans of some teams. RedBull, Lotus, and Williams were planning to design the ERS systems with 3rd party partners. In fact, Infiniti already started working on batteries for the new system only for RedBull. However, Mercedes is against the idea of 3rd party ERS systems, and if it has its way there will be no 3rd party or house built KERS.



Finally, the new engines will be much heavier, even without the ERS system.

LINKS:

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/2014-f1-cars-to-be-much-heavier-report/

If these news are true, I find all of this reasonable. FIA probably wants to avoid the excesses of the previous decades, when a few lucky teams got to work directly with a dedicated engine manufacturer, the rest of teams got a "customer engine", which was almost like a derogatory word, and engine development costs were very high.

[webberf1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebpkJXJ7CFo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Test-bed recording of Mercedes' new turbo engine revealed.
Sounds better than the Renault recording, but again I feel we need to wait til we see these on track before making a proper assessment. Chances are they will sound a lot like the 80s turbos which were awesome.

[call_me_andrew]

It does seem like there's more noise comming from the turbo than the long block. So much for turbos as a muffling device.

[Mia 01]

The rumour is that the Ferrari engine consumes moore fuel than the other engines. Therefore Fernando to Red Bull.

[zako85]

The rumour is that the Ferrari engine consumes moore fuel than the other engines. Therefore Fernando to Red Bull.

I kind of wonder how Ferrari insiders got the intelligence on the rival engine fuel consumption ..

[anfield5]

I kind of wonder how Ferrari insiders got the intelligence on the rival engine fuel consumption ..

Via a copy centre and a fax machine :)

[555-04Q2]

Via a copy centre and a fax machine :)

:laugh: :up:

[Mia 01]

Perhaps Alonso belives in rumours. Next year each car got 100 kg of fuel for the whole race, today they can carrie 150 kg. And yes, the rumour says that the Ferrari engine is bigger and consumes moore fuel than its rivals.

[Parabolica]

Italy is full of rumours this time of year.

If I had a Euro for every the doom-and-gloom story about Ferrari that has appeared in the Italian press, I would be fighting off Supermodels with a stick.

I would wait a little yet before passing judgement.

[steveaki13]

I cant believe it would stay like that, I mean the work that would be needed to make up for that would be huge, so it will be something they look into.

[SGWilko]

I would be fighting off Supermodels with a stick.



Why fight? I'd surrender... :p

[anfield5]

Why fight? I'd surrender... :p

Unless they looked like Traffic Wardens

[TheFamousEccles]

^^

Oh yeah, book me baby - I'm double parked....

[TheFamousEccles]

Meanwhile, un-specified sources appear to say:

Report - Mercedes to have 100hp advantage in 2014? | News | Motorsport.com (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/report-mercedes-to-have-100hp-advantage-in-2014/)

[zako85]

Meanwhile, un-specified sources appear to say:

Report - Mercedes to have 100hp advantage in 2014? | News | Motorsport.com (http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/report-mercedes-to-have-100hp-advantage-in-2014/)

I really wonder how did they come up with the 100hp number. The new engines have restricted displacement, restricted RPM, restricted air flow/presure, and restricted fuel capacity (in fact I think reduced from what it is now). Where can the 100HP delta come from? And why is Alonso allegedly trying to get into the 2nd Red Bull seat if Mercedes will have more power? ;p

By the way, some other links I posted above suggested that the maximum horsepower will not be important that much and engines will rarely be reved to the RPM limit due to fuel conservation.

[Parabolica]

There's a rumour that the new Ferrari engine only runs on Carrot juice.

With a power output of 2500 bhp, but only on the 3rd Tuesday of the month, due to religious reasons.

Oh, and Lady Gaga is a man.

[SGWilko]

Oh, and Lady Gaga is a man.

She's got bigger balls than some folk to wear some of the shyte she calls fashion.....

[AndyL]

I really wonder how did they come up with the 100hp number. The new engines have restricted displacement, restricted RPM, restricted air flow/presure, and restricted fuel capacity (in fact I think reduced from what it is now). Where can the 100HP delta come from? And why is Alonso allegedly trying to get into the 2nd Red Bull seat if Mercedes will have more power? ;p

Yes sounds pretty implausible to me. I'd guess it suits someone to put such a rumour around. Perhaps someone who wants to plant the idea that Mercedes will run away with things if they get their way on next year's tyre specifications. Or maybe the F1 journos are just bored :)

[ioan]

I really wonder how did they come up with the 100hp number. The new engines have restricted displacement, restricted RPM, restricted air flow/presure, and restricted fuel capacity (in fact I think reduced from what it is now). Where can the 100HP delta come from? And why is Alonso allegedly trying to get into the 2nd Red Bull seat if Mercedes will have more power? ;p

By the way, some other links I posted above suggested that the maximum horsepower will not be important that much and engines will rarely be reved to the RPM limit due to fuel conservation.

Don't lose sleep over it, most F1 articles are written by people who have absolutely no technical knowledge, let alone understand how engines work and what are the technical possibilities with fairly closed regulations.

[Parabolica]

I agree with the above post.

Horsepower is also not an indicator of how an engine will perform. There are other, more important, factors. Fuel efficiency, Ttorque curve, delivery of the power and, even perhaps more important than anything now, aero-packaging of the unit. A horsepower advantage is nothing if an aero advantage is given away. The current Renault engine may lack out-and-out grunt, bit the way it can be packaged into the overall car design more than compensates.

Only when the cars have run several times on track will any real sense be available to judge the manufacturers.

Until then, it is best to keep calm and ignore information got second-hand from bored andheadline-hunting journalists.

[555-04Q2]

The new turbo's will be quick, but I'm gonna miss the sound of the V8's. Still miss the roar of the old V10's and V12's :(

[steveaki13]

The new turbo's will be quick, but I'm gonna miss the sound of the V8's. Still miss the roar of the old V10's and V12's :(

Couldnt agree more.

I miss the days when F1 teams had all manner of V8s, V10s, V12s.

Variety is the spice of life.

[webberf1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebpkJXJ7CFo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Test-bed recording of Mercedes' new turbo engine revealed.
Sounds better than the Renault recording, but again I feel we need to wait til we see these on track before making a proper assessment. Chances are they will sound a lot like the 80s turbos which were awesome.
As I predicted, all the noobs who thought the turbos would sound like vacuum cleaners on racecars ended up wrong. Test-bed recordings never sound like the real thing when it's in action. You really only needed to go back to the (awesome-sounding) 80s cars to get a good idea what they would sound like.

Don't know if this is already posted, but a recording of the new Ferrari turbo put in the LaFerrari chassis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXNLQQC_AGU

To me, that's a kickass sound, and it will sound even more awesome when the throttles are wide open in race trim. I immediately like it better than the 2.4L V8s.

[N. Jones]

Is Lotus using Renault engines for 2014?

[Rollo]

Is Lotus using Renault engines for 2014?

Yes.

http://www.fia.com/2014-fia-f1-world-ch ... entry-list (http://www.fia.com/2014-fia-f1-world-championship-entry-list)
Lotus F1 Team, Lotus, Renault

[AndyL]

Is Lotus using Renault engines for 2014?

Yes.

http://www.fia.com/2014-fia-f1-world-ch ... entry-list (http://www.fia.com/2014-fia-f1-world-championship-entry-list)
Lotus F1 Team, Lotus, Renault

Quite late in the day for official confirmation! Even into last week that hadn't been officially announced. I guess Lotus finally paid their bill from Renault.

[minardi]

After months of anticipation, the MERCEDES AMG PETRONAS Formula One Team exclusively reveals the very first clip of Formula One 2014 in action, as our F1 W 05 car makes its inaugural run at the Silverstone circuit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkMh_PCfWTo

[steveaki13]

The sound isn't quite as bad as I thought. But really would need to see and hear it for a slightly longer time.

Oh and love the car by the way. ;)

[AJP]

Is that the 2013 car with the new engine? Or the 2014 car...if it's the 2014 car, nice way to build suspense :)

[RS]

Don't know if this is already posted, but a recording of the new Ferrari turbo put in the LaFerrari chassis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXNLQQC_AGU


Ooo, that's clever. A very nice sound, but seems quite quiet? Once it is out of view you can't hear it anymore.

[greencroft]

Can anyone tell me what sort of amount of fuel F1 cars previously used for races so I can understand better how much of a constraint the 100 litre restriction will be?

I would guess that consumption varied a lot between circuits but the tank capacities must have been designed for the thirstiest ones.

Will the energy recovery system mean that any such comparison is meaningless?

What kind of power boost are these sytems supposed to produce?

[Tazio]

Can anyone tell me what sort of amount of fuel F1 cars previously used for races so I can understand better how much of a constraint the 100 litre restriction will be?

I would guess that consumption varied a lot between circuits but the tank capacities must have been designed for the thirstiest ones.

Will the energy recovery system mean that any such comparison is meaningless?

What kind of power boost are these sytems supposed to produce?
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules ... ons/12877/ (http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/sporting_regulations/12877/) :dork:

[MAX_THRUST]

OH DEAR!!!!!

It was great to hear the crowd it was great to hear the tyres squealing, it was great that commentators can be heard from pit lane and no one will be having any more hearing problems. A real shame they have killed F1 with these shit sounding engines.....massively disappointed today. The cars don't seem fast casue I can't hear them. That makes no sense I know????

:angryfire :mad: :skull: is this the end of F1, they sound like crap IRL cars from the 90's not as good as Indy cars of today, Aussie V8s, F2, F3 Formula Renault 3.5 etc. What a huge mistake. Great tech but really this is dyre

[steveaki13]

I am sure its possible to turn up the sound so to speak if they want to.

[Mark]

Actually hadn't heard them until just now. Awful. :(

[journeyman racer]

It's not really that bad. Maybe a bit more of a growl will do, but not that big of a deal. There a more significant problems, competitive and spectacle, that are worth more attention.

[Mark]

The complaints about the lack of noise even made it to the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning!

Mentioning this article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motors ... d-sue.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/10704361/Bernie-Ecclestone-promises-noisier-F1-cars-as-promoter-of-Australian-Grand-Prix-could-sue.html)

[SGWilko]

I think what seems to be lost in all the complaints about the lack of noise is 'why' there is such less noise.

The engines are not that much less powerful, it is just that the turbo is now not only boosting the inlet pressure, but is also used to harvest energy that would otherwise just be lost as heat and noise out of the exhaust.

I find it fascinating that the excess energy from the exhaust - ERS H - can now be put to good use to boost power by directly powering the ERS K.

The amount of money and resources put to good use to get ever more useable and efficient power from these PU's, can only lead to much more efficient road cars a few years down the line.

[Whyzars]

The amount of money and resources put to good use to get ever more useable and efficient power from these PU's, can only lead to much more efficient road cars a few years down the line.

It is brilliant technology but they're the punters dollars and they'll disappear if they can hear their wives asking questions during the race. :)

The V6/KERS approach to F1 is just not good for the sport in my opinion. :eek:

F1 is a monument to mankinds achievements. F1 is not is a political tool or a test bed for European car makers. I know that I don't watch the races to see someone testing the next generation of small car or the next planet saving battery.


How do they get the sh*t back in this horse? I'm thinking V8's by mid season. Unlimited fuel and revs within two races...

[AndyL]

How do they get the sh*t back in this horse? I'm thinking V8's by mid season. Unlimited fuel and revs within two races...

It would be a start I suppose :) Rolls-Royce Merlins by next year, you wouldn't hear anyone complaining about the noise then. Or indeed anything else.

[BleAivano]

How do they get the sh*t back in this horse? I'm thinking V8's by mid season. Unlimited fuel and revs within two races...

It would be a start I suppose :) Rolls-Royce Merlins by next year, you wouldn't hear anyone complaining about the noise then. Or indeed anything else.

I wouldn't mind but something like this would also work, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOCP6JWQt_0

[COD]

Turbo engines can sound pretty amazing too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq1OJk10 ... ata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq1OJk10urg&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

[anfield5]

Speaking in the face of public opinion maybe, but, I honestly didn't mind the sound the new things were making. Granted slightly louder would be nice, but overall the V6 burble and the whistling-whine of the turbos wasn't that bad. It is unique to F1.

Don't misunderstand me, I would rather have the ground-shaking, ear-bursting feral growl of a big V12 than what we have now, or the high-pitched banshee wail of a V10, but overall it wasn't too unpleasant.

[anfield5]

How do they get the sh*t back in this horse? I'm thinking V8's by mid season. Unlimited fuel and revs within two races...

It would be a start I suppose :) Rolls-Royce Merlins by next year, you wouldn't hear anyone complaining about the noise then. Or indeed anything else.

This I would love. The Merlin sound is one of the best engine noises ever produced. Watching a Lancaster bomber with 4 of these things spinning is absolutely spine chilling, not to mention the thrumming feeling that goes through you entire body as they flash past

http://www.hotrodphotos.co.uk/images/images.GoodwoodFestivalOfSpeed2004/'Babs'%20land%20speed%20record%20car.jpg

[Robinho]

I'd love it if they could use the v16 from the '60's brms, but that's just not going to happen, IMO I like the new sound, although the merc sounds much better than the Ferrari. Sure a bit louder might be nice, but given the work done to maximise the efficiency of the units, falsely increasing the noise seems counter intuitive to me

[Storm]

nobody is doubting that stopping waste of energy from exhaust et al is not a good thing..infact I am wondering why that hasn't already made it to most road cars till now - but that is where we need the energy saving - in the billion road cars running around. not necessarily in the 22 cards running 18 times a year - they should not care too much abt energy harvested at the expense of one the main things regarding the spectacle of racing, the growl of the engines.

[SGWilko]

nobody is doubting that stopping waste of energy from exhaust et al is not a good thing..infact I am wondering why that hasn't already made it to most road cars till now - but that is where we need the energy saving - in the billion road cars running around. not necessarily in the 22 cards running 18 times a year - they should not care too much abt energy harvested at the expense of one the main things regarding the spectacle of racing, the growl of the engines.

Ah, yes. But F1 has money to throw at these problems - and if you can get folks to understand it in F1, they are more likely to buy a road car when the same tech is available.....

[anfield5]

There is a way to make the cars sound louder (and according to many of us - better). Turn up the volume on the tv and put it on the channel without commentary - I did this for a part of the race on Sunday, not only did I not have to put up with the commentators dribbling on about how the cars sounded, whilst talking non stop over the top of them so the rest of us couldn't hear the things, but the engine song on high volume esp the scream of the turbos really upset my dog, so it can't have been all bad because he hated the sound of last years cars as well

[steveaki13]

There is a way to make the cars sound louder (and according to many of us - better). Turn up the volume on the tv and put it on the channel without commentary - I did this for a part of the race on Sunday, not only did I not have to put up with the commentators dribbling on about how the cars sounded, whilst talking non stop over the top of them so the rest of us couldn't hear the things, but the engine song on high volume esp the scream of the turbos really upset my dog, so it can't have been all bad because he hated the sound of last years cars as well

What commentary do you get in New Zealand Anfield5? A New Zealand broadcast or do they take BBC or Sky from the UK?

[Koz]

What commentary do you get in New Zealand Anfield5? A New Zealand broadcast or do they take BBC or Sky from the UK?

I'm (pretty sure FPs were BBC, because they kept referring to their programme on BBC7) qualifying and the race are Sky.
We also get a "special F1 pop-up" channel that shows other footage, I forgot all about it this year.

[henners88]

The technology used this season may be useful to the car industry and might be ticking all the boxes for innovation, but its dreadfully dull from a fans perspective (not all fans evidently though). The racing may be good and this season might end up being the best for a number of years, its just the finishing touch is missing for me. I think a powerful sound gives the impression of speed and highlights it even more for F1. I don't get the same buzz standing at the side of the motorway watching diesel cars going past. I saw a comparison video from the Oz GP from 2013 to this year and the difference is immense. Then again I have no desire whatsoever to pay to go to a GP, I've been many times already but like anything associated with F1 these days, its just expensive. I'll be even less enthusiastic when F1 goes fully electric and we have silent cars. At least you'll be able to hear a bit of tyre squeal and chat to your mates track-side, so it has its bonuses :p :)

[airshifter]

There is a way to make the cars sound louder (and according to many of us - better). Turn up the volume on the tv and put it on the channel without commentary - I did this for a part of the race on Sunday, not only did I not have to put up with the commentators dribbling on about how the cars sounded, whilst talking non stop over the top of them so the rest of us couldn't hear the things, but the engine song on high volume esp the scream of the turbos really upset my dog, so it can't have been all bad because he hated the sound of last years cars as well

I've been tempted to try other channels for this reason. The primary channel over here seems to put commercials in the worst spots, and they ramble about anything endlessly.

I actually like the strange sounds of the new cars, it just needs more volume.

[Doc Austin]

Having grown to watching sports cars at Daytona and Sebring in the 60s and 70s, I've seen and heard a pretty vast array of different sounding engines. I saw the Matra V12s run, plus the Group C four rotor Wankel. Those were ear splitting good, but I also enjoyed the turbine cars and Diesel Audis.

All I really care about is good racing, and the new F1 cars seem like they might be capable of that. I do love it that they are an handful to hang on to and you can see the drivers really working. Vettel's in-car camera during quali was fascinating.

[anfield5]

What commentary do you get in New Zealand Anfield5? A New Zealand broadcast or do they take BBC or Sky from the UK?We get the coverage that has DC, McNish and co on it so I guess it is the BBC. But this year Sky NZ have a pop-up channel for F1 that has different camera angles and no commentary.

[The Black Knight]

Having grown to watching sports cars at Daytona and Sebring in the 60s and 70s, I've seen and heard a pretty vast array of different sounding engines. I saw the Matra V12s run, plus the Group C four rotor Wankel. Those were ear splitting good, but I also enjoyed the turbine cars and Diesel Audis.

All I really care about is good racing, and the new F1 cars seem like they might be capable of that. I do love it that they are an handful to hang on to and you can see the drivers really working. Vettel's in-car camera during quali was fascinating.

Well considering he had a software issue then it's not really that fascinating and I doubt that he'll have all that trouble hanging onto the car throughout qualifying again.

To be honest, I think the cars sounds awful. They remind me of a Chevrolet I drove in the states. Exactly the same sound. They also look so slow. I know they will get faster but really the lack of sound makes it really dull. I do miss the roar of a v8 engine. There was something special about it. There's nothing special about this, just a big turbo strapped onto the engine - meh. But as you say, as long as the racing is good that's the main thing.

The good thing is that tires didn't seem to be a huge factor. I prefer it that way and hope it continues. I don't mind tires playing a part but last year it was ridiculous how much influence they had over the races.

[Doc Austin]

The good thing is that tires didn't seem to be a huge factor. I prefer it that way and hope it continues. I don't mind tires playing a part but last year it was ridiculous how much influence they had over the races.

Last year, more often than not, Mercedes' undoing was their car's inability to get the most out of the tires. With that taken out of the equation, Rosberg simply drove away.

[The Black Knight]

Last year, more often than not, Mercedes' undoing was their car's inability to get the most out of the tires. With that taken out of the equation, Rosberg simply drove away.

Well the thing about this years tires is that they are hard to get up to the correct operating temperature and keep them there. This should play into the hands of the likes of Mercedes. They currently have the best car on the grid, whether or not this will continue over the course of the season remains to be seen, but, for now, I can't see any team catching them before Spain or Monaco. What amazed me more than anything else was how easily Rosberg pulled away once fuel saving was no longer an issue after the safety car. He was pulling out at over a second per lap. This is a big gap for the following teams to close especially considering the budget and development potential that Mercedes have.

Saying that, there is no use in having the best car on the grid and it nothing being reliable such as what happened to Hamilton. To me it stinks once again of McLaren in 2012 where Hamilton should have been world champion were it not for team failures. I hope the same doesn't happen this year at Mercedes as he deserves a second championship.

[journeyman racer]

Hamilton should've been world champ in '12???

Obligatory acknowledgement that Alonso was moral champ in '12. Some of these Hamilton fans, they remind you why you didn't like him in the first place.

But anyway, so as not to completely derail the thread, I've actually developed an anticipation for the next race, which I haven't had for a very long time. In fact so much so, that even though I don't attend the GP, despite the race being a 20kms away. I actually can't wait for next year's AGP, where I'm likely to attend Friday at least.

Despite Rosberg's lengthy margin in winning, I don't have the same confidence he, or Hamilton, will romp away in Malaysia, like I've had with Vettel previously. In Australia, Rosberg had it all his own way. But it'll be interesting to see how much of a factor reliability will be if, in a similar situation, Hamilton is there to put pressure on him. Adding to that, it seems McLaren will also be there to add further pressure on the reliability element. It's now that the forced tyre/compound use should be scrapped. Adding the unknown element of variable tyre tactics, would make F1 more stressful to compete in. You'd have to work really hard for a win, certainly more than Vettel, for most of the last four years.

Regarding "the fans" complaints about engine noise. I fail to see how a non-competitive feature of F1/motorsport can be taken so seriously? How can anyone miss the high revving paperweights? They were terrible. Are you a genuine fan, or a theatregoer? If you're a theatregoer, and you're in Europe, then I'd suggest going to a EuroBOSS race.

[henners88]

Well the thing about this years tires is that they are hard to get up to the correct operating temperature and keep them there. This should play into the hands of the likes of Mercedes. They currently have the best car on the grid, whether or not this will continue over the course of the season remains to be seen, but, for now, I can't see any team catching them before Spain or Monaco. What amazed me more than anything else was how easily Rosberg pulled away once fuel saving was no longer an issue after the safety car. He was pulling out at over a second per lap. This is a big gap for the following teams to close especially considering the budget and development potential that Mercedes have.

Saying that, there is no use in having the best car on the grid and it nothing being reliable such as what happened to Hamilton. To me it stinks once again of McLaren in 2012 where Hamilton should have been world champion were it not for team failures. I hope the same doesn't happen this year at Mercedes as he deserves a second championship.
Yeah this season will be a real test for Mercedes to see if they have ability to keep up with development pace and let's face they've always struggled with this in the past. Right now I think the real advantage is the power plant and I can't help but think by mid season Renault will have over come some of the overheating issues and if it comes down to downforce and aero, Red Bull have been the best in recent times. It's hotting up to be a fascinating season in that respect and we should try and enjoy the racing before it all beds down. Lewis has his work cut out with Nico and I like that. I hope if it does come down to a decider between the two, I hope Nico runs him to the wire. Although it's Hamilton for me first, I really wouldn't be disappointed if Nico was champ this year. Mercedes just need to get their reliability under control if they already haven't :)

[The Black Knight]

Hamilton should've been world champ in '12???

Obligatory acknowledgement that Alonso was moral champ in '12. Some of these Hamilton fans, they remind you why you didn't like him in the first place.

But anyway, so as not to completely derail the thread, I've actually developed an anticipation for the next race, which I haven't had for a very long time. In fact so much so, that even though I don't attend the GP, despite the race being a 20kms away. I actually can't wait for next year's AGP, where I'm likely to attend Friday at least.

Despite Rosberg's lengthy margin in winning, I don't have the same confidence he, or Hamilton, will romp away in Malaysia, like I've had with Vettel previously. In Australia, Rosberg had it all his own way. But it'll be interesting to see how much of a factor reliability will be if, in a similar situation, Hamilton is there to put pressure on him. Adding to that, it seems McLaren will also be there to add further pressure on the reliability element. It's now that the forced tyre/compound use should be scrapped. Adding the unknown element of variable tyre tactics, would make F1 more stressful to compete in. You'd have to work really hard for a win, certainly more than Vettel, for most of the last four years.

Regarding "the fans" complaints about engine noise. I fail to see how a non-competitive feature of F1/motorsport can be taken so seriously? How can anyone miss the high revving paperweights? They were terrible. Are you a genuine fan, or a theatregoer? If you're a theatregoer, and you're in Europe, then I'd suggest going to a EuroBOSS race.

While I agree that Alonso should have been champion and deserved to be over the course of the season, when you look at the amount of points that Hamilton dropped through mechanical failures and McLaren blunders he would have won that championship. So yes, from that point of view, he should have been champion. I do agree,however, that Alonso was the moral champion that year :)

[BleAivano]

Turbo engines can sound pretty amazing too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq1OJk10 ... ata_player (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq1OJk10urg&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

Audi Quattro (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AQmgeMoM0A) is nicer. ;)

[journeyman racer]

While I agree that Alonso should have been champion and deserved to be over the course of the season, when you look at the amount of points that Hamilton dropped through mechanical failures and McLaren blunders he would have won that championship. So yes, from that point of view, he should have been champion. I do agree,however, that Alonso was the moral champion that year :)
I don't know if he'd have won it for certain. But I'd agree with a notion that he would've been more worthy of it than Vettel. Maybe I overreacted a bit.