Page 51 of 72 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 510 of 717
  1. #501
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    1,067
    Like
    527
    Liked 601 Times in 320 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by becher View Post
    There has been comments from drivers about the switch to "stick shift" and the potential to damage the gearbox. As far as I undrstand, they will still be running a sequentiel dogbox, and only got rid of a fairly "simple" hydraulic system to actuate the gearbox. If my understanding of the regulations is correct, how would that be a significant cost saving like the FIA claims and how would one be able to damage the gearbox any more than with a paddle actuated gearbox?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mbCJecCDr8

    Apparently, removing the active centre diff and paddle shifter allows to remove the hydraulic system which saves money.

  2. Likes: AnttiL (14th January 2022),cali (14th January 2022)
  3. #502
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,503
    Like
    7,826
    Liked 11,150 Times in 4,426 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by becher View Post
    There has been comments from drivers about the switch to "stick shift" and the potential to damage the gearbox. As far as I undrstand, they will still be running a sequentiel dogbox, and only got rid of a fairly "simple" hydraulic system to actuate the gearbox. If my understanding of the regulations is correct, how would that be a significant cost saving like the FIA claims and how would one be able to damage the gearbox any more than with a paddle actuated gearbox?
    Quote Originally Posted by WRCStan View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mbCJecCDr8

    Apparently, removing the active centre diff and paddle shifter allows to remove the hydraulic system which saves money.
    That's true but it also removes the possibility to control the shifting by the ECU. Honestly I have no idea how the WRC gearshift system was designed but I would expect that indirect shifting by the hydraulics can be set that it prevents shifting which would set the revolution speed outside of the safe range. With direct mechanical lever it is not possible. In the end the effect on the reliability may be worse than saving created by not using the hydraulics.

    Damage from improper shifting used to be quite common with the S2000 cars where improper downshifting was really an easy mistake. I recall situations when RPM in the range of 10-11 thousand was achieved by mistake and it often lead to catastrophic damage.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  4. Likes: WRCStan (14th January 2022)
  5. #503
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,503
    Like
    7,826
    Liked 11,150 Times in 4,426 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by kubiczech View Post
    Wrcwings says:
    f) the recuperation by braking is limited to 30kW, no matter how hard a driver brakes,


    https://www.wrcwings.tech/2021/09/14...-implications/
    I expected a lot more to be honest. That means that the braking effect will be also really small. For proper racing braking you need values 10x higher or more I guess.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  6. #504
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    47
    Like
    9
    Liked 13 Times in 6 Posts
    Any new brand for 2023?

  7. #505
    Senior Member bandit12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Туркменистан
    Posts
    267
    Like
    11
    Liked 300 Times in 127 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Ricardo Filipe Matos View Post
    Any new brand for 2023?
    Dacia

  8. #506
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,503
    Like
    7,826
    Liked 11,150 Times in 4,426 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirek View Post
    I expected a lot more to be honest. That means that the braking effect will be also really small. For proper racing braking you need values 10x higher or more I guess.
    After some discussions on this topic I realized that the total capacity of the battery is what limits the recuperation power to a relativerly low value like this.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  9. Likes: cali (16th January 2022),Tanelv (17th January 2022)
  10. #507
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    1,067
    Like
    527
    Liked 601 Times in 320 Posts
    Looking at kinetic energy values, 10x appears only really useful at high speeds at realistic efficiencies, stages where you won't be needing the boost so much anyway.

  11. #508
    Senior Member Mirek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Prague / Eastern Bohemia
    Posts
    22,503
    Like
    7,826
    Liked 11,150 Times in 4,426 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by WRCStan View Post
    Looking at kinetic energy values, 10x appears only really useful at high speeds at realistic efficiencies, stages where you won't be needing the boost so much anyway.
    I think you undersestimate the deceleration value a lot. Let's say you need to slow down the Rally1 car from 150 km/h to 100 km/h on asphalt (from 42 m/s to 28 m/s). The car has around 1400 kg with the crew. The kinetic energy at the start of braking is 1,235 GJ. The kinetic energy at the end is 0,549 GJ. You need to take away 0,686 GJ of energy. Now the crucial part is how fast you do that. Let's say it happens at an average value of 2G which is for sure possible, I guess it's more in good conditions but on the other hand a reasonable part of the braking energy is taken away by aerodynamic drag and I completely omit that here. If we stick with these values it means that it takes 0,7 seconds to slow down from 150 km/h to 100 km/h. 0,686GJ at 0,7 seconds means 970 kW braking power.

    For sure it's just a very simplified example but I guess it can make an idea about the magnitude of the values.
    Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump

  12. Likes: AnttiL (17th January 2022),cali (16th January 2022)
  13. #509
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2021
    Posts
    1,067
    Like
    527
    Liked 601 Times in 320 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Mirek View Post
    I think you undersestimate the deceleration value a lot.
    I get what you're saying and it's also exponential, there's just as much packed in 185 to 175 as there is from 60 to 0. I was coming from the angle that what tech they have is to give acceleration boosts and that it's not an EV in a game of charging batteries. My theory is you won't be calling for a boost that often on the Finlands, Arctics, Estonias, however you'll want them repeatedly in the slower twistier stages where the 30kW limit becomes proportionally more of what is possible to recover. The limit is not my choice it's what we have.

    Anyway, here's a magical thought given the limit. The slower drivers may get more boost juice back then the faster drivers. Wouldn't count on noticing it though.

  14. #510
    Senior Member Fast Eddie WRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    18,865
    Like
    3,426
    Liked 9,343 Times in 4,962 Posts
    Will the driver notice a big difference in feeling when braking the Rally1's with the regen slowing the car more than the brakes ? Also how does the handbrake act on on the new cars in terms of brakes or regen ?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •