http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?...756&fSetId=381
Check out the final paragraph .
Printable View
http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?...756&fSetId=381
Check out the final paragraph .
Personally, I don't know why Turbos were banned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
They have the potential to offer smaller, faster, more efficient engines yet are banned :confused:
Quite so, I don't recall the reason for them being banned. Perhaps at the time (late 80's) turbos were still an expensive technology and it was done to save costs.
I know that at the time there were still teams running normally aspirated engines, there must have been a reason for that. As I recall Johnathan Palmer was normally aspirated world champion!
Of course these days turbos are very much a mainsteam technology and are well understood, getting on for half of new cars sold in the UK have turbo-chargers, although most of those are bolted onto diesel engines.
The main problem with bringing back turbos is it would require a fundamental redesign of the engines from scratch, and that's just about the most expensive approach there is!
Turbocharged engines will almost always be cheaper than n/a engines. But like Mark says the whole redesign thing is a bitch for costs.
I'd love to see turbos return in their purest form like in the 80s. But sadly I worry that in today's climate they'd be used to "control performance" and introduce stupid gimmicks like "push to pass" and what have you.
There was a cost component as you say and safety was also a reason. Now this is working my few brain cells - I also seem to remember there was something about turbo's being a 'dead end' technology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Engine developers and manufacturers wanted their money going into technology that could benefit their consumer sales and customers just didn't want turbo's to go to the local shops. F1 kept limiting the pressures but the turbo cars kept winning in spite of the efforts to level the playing field with the non-turbo cars.
Don't quote me on this but that has always been my memory of why the turbo's were banned.
Roll forward 20 years and we find turbo's coming back into favour because they provide a lot of power from a very small and lightweight block which provides very efficient usage of our planet's resources.
In years to come an F1 developed turbo charger might be the must-have for the environmentally conscious driver.
Who'd've thunk... :)
I've posted that a few times :p Don't be suprised if all but the cheapest new petrol cars in 5-10 years time will have a turbo, direct injection and no camshafts. All in the name of efficiency.
I think modern oils and modern manufacturing tolerances are going to make this very possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Turbo's got a bad rap because of poor driver habits and coked oils and I think only Saab and Volvo really stuck with turbo's for the consumer market. New oils and better manufacture should see turbo's in the mainstream more and more. As was mentioned earlier, we're already seeing this in diesels
BTW, its 20 years since turbo's raced in F1 and I was at the track in Adelaide in '88 for their last appearance. The turbo cars really screamed. I still remember my teeth vibrating whenever a turbo car went by. You REALLY needed ear plugs with the turbo's. Great memories to look back on.
:)
So , you guys haven't noticed at all that this was Max saying this ?
I want you guys to notice that you are all in complete agreement with the man this time , as am I .
This is a good idea , and relevent to today's world .
That said , I also think that the technological aspect of F1 being irrelevent to today's road cars is much overstated .
The simulations and modelling used in F1 , the computer aspect must be yielding benefit to the road car world .
No matter the size or shape of the part , the engineering behind the manufacture and innovation within must also surely transmit ideas into the assembly line .
Simply put , if you can run with the big guys , you must be able to make a street car .
As with Monkeys in a room writing a Shakespeare play given enough time, the amount of crap ideas Max throws at the wall must one day result in one of them being a good one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
However, the Law of Sod detirmines that as such, this idea will not reach fruition :D
Dude you don't give the people of this forum credit for not being blinded by their hatred of one person or one team to not bring it up when that person has a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagwan
Oh crap I didn't see Knock-on's post :) You were right Bagwan :)
It's not about hatred of one person. It's about what that one person is threatening to do to F1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
Knockie's right that Max is well known for throwing so much crap around that eventually little bits of it stick...somewhere. Ferrari are not alone in having had enough of his way of doing things.
With all due respect that's rubbish. Discuss the idea and not the person who's brought it up. After all this thread is about turbo's and not Max Mosley until one of the troublemakers decided to bring it up :)Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1
Seems like a good idea. Would go against cost cutting completely, but it seems like a good idea.
With all due respect, we are free to discuss whatever we wish within the confines of the forum regulations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I also don't see Baggy as a trouble maker; something I can't really say about you.
This is a thread about Turbos. Discuss turbos or go to the many other threads where Max is quite justifiably hated and mouth off about him. Some of us actually want to discuss F1 and technical regs. Yes I know Max is a fool and have known it for years. Show some maturity and get over it!
Sorry Daniel, I hadn't realised you had been made a Moderator.
May I suggest you stop being so hypocritical and stick to the subject matter (Turbos) rather than write rubbish about Max and myself like this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
I was making a point and if you can't see that then there's no hope. This is turning into a he said she said discussion and i'm not really on for childishness like that.
:laugh:
You make statements and then accuse people of being childish when your statements are proved to be foolish :laugh:
BACK TO SUBJECT - Max's idea about the possible introduction of Turbos.
<end>
Oh come, daniel and Knock-on , give it a rest, both of you.
Cheers Janneppi.
Whyzars, i wouldn't say Saab and Volvo were the only ones to keep using turbos. Subaru, Fiat/Lancia and a few others have been using turbo's quite reliably for a while. My other half's Legacy is 14 years old and has a petrol turbo engine and my Peugeot is 12 and has a turbo diesel engine and Peugeot had been using that engine for a fair few years previous. So I think the turbo is well proven but with petrol prices going up and efficency being a major selling point for cars anyone wanting anything even remotely fast is going to find a turbo under the bonnet if it wants to be attractive to the people who can't afford a big na engine.
I remember all the race writers mentioning how ear-splitting the atmos where compared with the turbos after the turbos were banned, due to the natural muffling effect of a turbo. The turbos were more powerful and they seem to pop and bang more, so maybe that's what you were experiencing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whyzars
It's long past due that they bring turbos back. Removing them as a speed limiting means was needed at the time, but they could just restructure engine rules and give the teams adequate time to develop smaller boosted engines once again.
Considering the potential with todays technology, it would make the cars handle even better, considering the weight savings and engine placement options of the smaller unit. Combine that with the wasted heat aspects and the KERS approach, and they have even more energy to recover.
Race writers who listened to these engines week in week out would be much better judges of the sound and their writings would be a more accurate archive because they don't fade over time. 20 years will always change memories for the better/louder/faster. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Miatanut
I'm pretty sure that I've still got a magazine that I bought at the track so I'll go digging for some articles of the time and if I find anything I'll post scans or something.
I can't remember the name of the left-right corner at the end of the main straight, (Wakefield??), but that's where I watched qualifying from. The cars came through absolutely flat out and looked for all the world like they were going to brush the wall - e v e r y s i n g l e t i m e. I was close enough to feel air move as cars went by and when you're that close everything screams. I never noticed the popping on the Saturday but on Sunday we were at a slower section of the track and the braking area for that section was a good way away. Some of the pops were like gunshots and actually had an "echo" off the surrounding buildings, they were all (insert adjective here) loud.
I haven't been to a GP for a good few years but the last one was at Silverstone and we were so far back from the track in Priory Stand that ear plugs were optional. Still a wonderful event but the distance from the track does affect the experience. I guess that 1988, and Adelaide being a street circuit, allowed for much closer viewing locations. Good times.
:)
Fair comment. I was thinking that Saab and Volvo don't focus on the sports car aspects of turbo's and that is what I was getting at but I didn't put that across too well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
:)
This would be the less than three months from Adelaide '88 to spring testing '89. I don't think they forgot what the turbos sounded like. I think the 20 years are changing YOUR memories for better/louder/faster. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Whyzars
In any case, it just stands to reason. If you've spent much time at sportscar races, you know between turbos and atmos of comparable outputs in the same race, the turbos are quieter. The vanes in the turbos smooth the exhaust pulses, reducing the volume.
The way I remember things from 20 years ago I'm always taller and slimmer than I was - does that count? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Miatanut
My sentence structure has failed miserably. What you write is what I meant ie. my own memories have faded. The journalists wrote about the engine sounds at the time so their account would be a much more reliable archive and I accept that.
I don't see it as an issue though as the turbos really did scream - in my opinion. If the later cars screamed louder then that's OK too.
:)