[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Formula 1 Engine Testing (Page 1 of 2)
|
Yeah. I can't follow the link from work so I don't know what this one is, but we had a thread maybe a month ago that had God Save the Queen, We Are the Champions, and When the Saints Go Marching In. Cool stuff. I remember when I went to my first F1 race in '03, driving past the track to the parking lot and hearing the first car fly by... the hair on my neck stood up. The first time I heard it from inside the track I almost had a tear in my eye. It wasn't that I was an overly emotional fan or something, I think it was just a strange response to an amazing sound. |
What is so special about current F1 engine technology... F1 cut way back on technology to reduce cost in some ways engines of today are less advanced than those run 20 years ago. And it looks as F1 will continue to cut back the technological race. BTW NASCARs old carburetor engines produce more horsepower that current F1 engines. |
Your last sentence is quite silly. The current F1 2.4 liter engines produce about 830 HP. NASCAR uses 5.7 liter engines that put out about 790 HP. 20 years ago F1 engines still used valve springs and could only rev to about 12,000 rpm. Today's F1 engines use pneumatic valve actuators and can rev to over 22,000 rpm, although they are limited by the rules to 19,000 rpm. The FIA does not restrict technology to lower costs, but keeps putting tighter limits on what can be done in order to keep the speed in a safe range. If FIA allowed the same displacement, and use of forced induction that they did 20 years ago, the cars would be outputting in excess of 1500 HP and the speeds would be far too high for safe racing. I doubt you will find too many people that think putting 1500+ HP in a 1300 pound car and driving it on a road course is a formula for safe racing. |
Don't burden him with facts. Evidently, the technology that allows V8 engines to reach 20K RPM without going thermonuclear doesn't impress him. BTW... I'm just a simple guy. I get impressed by little things like that. I just don't have the intellectual capacity to be a good NASCAR fan. I'll stick with my simple tastes of F1 and MotoGP racing. |
And no push rods. 
|
True, outlawing the turbos was a sad day. 1500+ bhp from a 3 litre was awesome.
Actually the HP is about the same, with a slight edge given to the F1s, but... F1s are half the displacement. I read somewhere that F1 is looking, or has looked, or may look, at bringing back turbos, but in a much smaller displacement. |
They are very similar only F-1 does it with a much smaller engine. NASCAR 358 cubic inches (5.87 liters) engines F-1 2.4 litres (147 cubic inches) engines In 2005 the Formula-1 3.0 liter V-10s were in the 900hp area. and F-1 engines are required to last for two full races without being torn down, rebuilt, etc. |
The current talk is FIA may mandate rev limited 2.2 liter turbo V6 biodiesel engines after the current new engine freeze is lifted. If I were a betting man, I would wager that they will still be able to get over 750-800 HP out of those. 
|
Silly huh… The V10s did above 900hp from everything I have see the 2.4L V8s don’t get near 800hp but run in the mid 700s. Part of the intent of going with the V8 was to cut back HP. I could be incorrect but I believe you are quite wrong and therefore the silly guy. |
19,000 rpm's or... 316.7 rps's  Thats absolutely insane... another testing vid |
2005 I don't think it is 2005 do you? I sugget you bone up on current F1 engines which produce 20% less hp that the 2005 engine. |
I think the new ones are at 780 bhp. Either way you shake it they are getting over twice as much power per liter as the engines NASCAR uses which is incredible. |
Huh? Current engines are outputting between 820 and 840HP. That is a less than 10% power loss despite a 20% displacement reduction. |
Really... I sugget you prove current F1 engines produce more HP than NASCAR... you will not be able to. Are F1 cars one currently running turbos like they were years ago… it was not me that said F1 was cutting back on technology to cut cost that would be F1 itself that said that. |
Wait... a min. ago you said 900+ now it ain't, which is it? F1 said 20% not me argue with them. |
They didn't do it to cut costs. Hell the turbo's didn't increase the cost all that much when you look at how much it costs to field a car for an entire season. They decided having a car that light with over 1500 horsepower wasn't safe enough. As far as I know thats the only reason, aside from being the main reason. |
Evidently not. Face it guys. Current F1 is old hat. Might as well be driving Yugo's. If my man Alonso could just work up the talent to be driving NASCAR he could step into some REAL technology. Now excuse me while I go back to my fried chicken and Budweiser. I'm working on my mad NASCAR fan skillz... 
|
Since you seem to be the only one who knows the magical figures, perhaps you can post the HP comparisons for us? While you are at it, you might what to post the HP/liter ratings for both as well. |
No he didn't, he said the 2005 ones were putting out 900 horsepower(which you, yourself pointed out). This time he is talking about current engines. Read through his post again a little slower. I wouldn't know about the 20% figure though. I've never heard that. Never heard 10% either though. |
Please show the post where I claimed 900 HP. |
So for whatever reason the cut back on technology and engines are is someways not as advanced as they were, meaning what I said was 100% correct... and BTW F1 said it part of cost reductions argue with them. |
Actually, it was someone else who posted the 900 HP figure. I am still waiting for Mike to post the super-secret HP ratings that only he knows. That will conclusively settle the argument. 
|
Well yes, 100% correct except the part where you were incorrect. 
|
Cost reduction was one reason given by FIA. It was not the only reason. Your original post stated the engines are less advnced than they were 20 years ago. This is patently false. 20 years ago they were unable to rev past about 12,000-13,000 rpm. Now they have to be limited by rules to keep the revs at 19,000. They output more HP per liter today than they did 20, or even 2 years ago. And unlike 20 years ago, they get more HP per liter while still being normally aspirated. So now, let's talk about how much more technologically advanced NASCAR engines get every year...
|
I just don't think that facts and common sense are going to work here man. For some reason, I'm picking up that Mike isn't impressed with current F1 technology. That somehow, NASCAR is a more advanced form of racing. I dunno how much Budweiser one must drink to come to that conclusion, but evidently there must be a point at which that happens.
|
You are either a fool are a liar I said no such thing. |
Can you comprehend whay you read or does it take pictures... I said in someways, where are the turbos... huh. False my ass I never said NASCAR engines were more advanced I did say their old carbonator engines produce more hp than current F1 engines which from everything in print on current F1 engines seems true... and am still waiting for you to show it is not. You need to actually read and comprehend what was posted. |
From your first post you've done nothing but try to somehow prove that F1 technology just ain't what it used to be, or what NASCAR IS. Both points are completely false. Horsepower/speed limits notwithstanding, the technology has continued to move ahead and is on another level than NASCAR technology. |
I never said it had not and never tried to show any such thing in regards ot F1 and NASCAR... Show me where I made any comparison other that HP… please show me. You apparently cannot understand simple sentences. So it must be fool. |
I see you cannot poduce squat so here... note HP figures: www.f1complete.com/content/view/1283/389/ www.answers.com/topic/list-of-formula-one-engines www.f1technical.net/articles/4 |
Either I'm a fool or you chose piss poor words if you didn't intend to cast current F1 technology as a backwards and old NASCAR technology as superior to current F1. |
I don't need to "bone up" The F-1 teams hold their data pretty close even for a few years after an engine is no longer being used so no one has a hard number on their HP. In 2006 Toyota, not exactly a leading team, said 740hp and that's with the base engine that is in use today. You can count on McLaren, Ferrari, BMW, and Renault having more. A Nascar engine is what 750-800hp? As I said before they are very similar. |
You are either a fool or a liar. Show me where I made any comparison other that HP… please show me. Are you so dense you don't understand what you read... do you know what OLD means. Do you know what OLD means? Again show me where I made any comparison other that HP… please show me. There is no point in this you seem hell bent or iinsisting I said something I did not say, and you will not admit you made a mistake when it is shown to you. Bye.  |
Except for the FACT that F1 engines are half the size of NASCAR powerplants and rev to twice the RPM. But that doesn't impress Mike. It's a throwback really...
|
This is the bottom line. I'm surprised we aren't arguing F1 vs Cart vs IRL. With the differences in technology and displacement and with the similar horsepower numbers, someone might make a valid point. |
So in other words what I said about current engine hp was 100% correct |
That was pretty much my point in lavishing praise on F1 technology and giving NASCAR the  face. But Mike jumped in to disagree with his NASCAR "O" face and here we are!
|
So let me get this straight here... are you saying that just because of the horsepower reduction rules, that somehow that equals technology going backwards? It doesn't impress you at all that smaller engines are made to produce more horsepower per liter than previously? That's somehow going backwards in the world of engine technology? |
Nothing has been shown by you to prove your claim. A mid pack F-1 team says they have 740hp you can figure on the top tier teams having 5-10% more. That makes it 777-814 and that is every bit the equal of or better than the published Nascar numbers isn't it? |
|
I have never been to an F1 race but it is on my list of life goals. I went to my first Indy race last month at the 500 and will be at Iowa on the 24th. Indy cars alone astonish me, F1 blows my mind! I don't have an F1 driver that I cheer for I like Kimi but I don't like Ferrari so I am stuck. I like all open wheel racing though and I DVR F1, CART, Indy and the LeMans series. I watch NASCAR when my roommate does but the only time I am really intersted it in is when they run the road courses. |