FIA confirms 1.6-litre engines for 2013

2013 F1 season

Vitantonio Liuzzi, Toro Rosso, Bahrain, 2006

The 2.4-litre engines used since 2006 will be scrapped

The FIA has confirmed a reduction in F1 engine capacity for 2013.

The World Motor Sport Council met today to approve the changes to the engine rules.

F1 teams have been required to use 2.4-litre V8 engines since 2006. There will be replaced by 1.6-litre, four-cylinder units.

The number of engines each driver may use per season will also be reduced.

A statement released by the FIA said:

The WMSC approved the introduction of a new specification engine from 2013, underlining the FIA?s commitment to improving sustainability and addressing the needs of the automotive industry.

Following dialogue with the engine manufacturers and experts in this field, the power units will be four cylinders, 1.6 litre with high pressure gasoline injection up to 500 bar with a maximum of 12,000 rpm.

The engines will deliver a 35% reduction in fuel consumption and will feature extensive energy management and energy recovery systems, while maintaining current levels of performance.

In 2013, five engines will be permitted per driver, but each year after that the limit will be four.

Advert | Go Ad-free


108 comments on FIA confirms 1.6-litre engines for 2013


    Here’s a view from Silverstone Arena Grandstand of a supercar race, these cars have turbos and produce a beautiful low thrumming sound, imagine F1 cars will have a louder version of this, probably slightly higher too. Truth be told V8 F1’s are too high pitched for me, they need their voices broken….. again.

    A cyl Ferrari? Unheard of.

  2. Victorface said on 10th December 2010, 18:04

    Instead of 4 mpg, the cars might get 5 mpg!

  3. newnhamlea1 said on 10th December 2010, 18:21

    I would have liked the option for v6 turbos too, so we get some variation and I also dislike the rev cap, they should limit fuel load instead of rev’s. c’est la vie.

  4. Victor. said on 10th December 2010, 18:25

    Five engines? Whoa – pinnacle of motorsport!

    Also, why impose a rev limit? if teams want to rev it to 15,000, and potentially suffer the consequences, let them do it!

  5. David Stringer said on 10th December 2010, 18:25

    Get real you guys, these engines will not be turbos. A 1.6 turbo engine with 500 bar boost would self destruct before it got out of the garage. This must be a fuel injection pressure but even that is not as high as a road going TDCi diesel. These will be GDi engines like that used in some Ferrari California’s, some Porsche 997’s and the Jaguar/Land-Rover AJ-V8. Pretty boring stuff by comparison with Turbos

    • Jarred Walmsley said on 10th December 2010, 20:05

      Umm, the 500 bar boost is the fuel injection, they will be turbo’s otherwise they would not get anywhere near enough power, the turbo will most likely run about 6-9 bar. The 1980’s were 5.5 bar and I assume turbo technology has advanced significantly and will be able to supply more boost

  6. Latest F1 Rule: 3 tyres per race weekend!

  7. Even though it wasnt included in the WMSC statement i can’t imagine a low displacement engine not being a turbocharged one. It will be an interesting combination of high pressure direct injection fuel and high pressure induction. 5 engines going down to 4 i’m not crazy about although low revving they should in theory last longer anyway.

    the whole thing with the revs is elementary as to get an increase in RPM you need more, smaller cylinders. Lower conrod weight and lenght = faster and higher revs.

    And those concerned with the sound, fear not! Just youtube anything from the turbo era and IMO they sound a hell of a lot nicer!

  8. With new engine rules in 2013 I wouldn’t be very surprised if quite a few drivers use more than 5 engines during the season.

    • Leftie said on 10th December 2010, 20:57

      And anybody of the title contenders having an engine failure at any point of the season is most likely to be out of the championshiop, since the penalty of losing one engine is very high.

      I must admit i’m anything but optimistic about published changes.

      • US_Peter said on 10th December 2010, 21:31

        Hadn’t thought of that, but you’re right. Each engine will account for MUCH more of the season percentage-wise, so reliability will be paramount.

  9. Jameson said on 10th December 2010, 20:20

    The 500 BAR is the pressure of the fuel injectors—not the turbos.

  10. Valentino said on 10th December 2010, 21:59

    I don’t like any limitation in F1,…every limitation regarding engine numbers, engine rpm, horse-power, engine volume,…is retarded.
    This is F1, and its not supposed to be a cheep sport. I don’t want to “go green”, I want to see real racing.
    1,5 l engine is for F3 cars, they are ridiculing F1.
    In 10 years we are going to have 1 l engines and other stupid limitations.
    The Moto GP will have a bigger engine than F1 in a couple of years,..
    If they worry about the environment let them use special exhausts that lower the CO2 emission,..

  11. Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 10th December 2010, 22:18

    I don’t understand the bad rap the new regulations are getting. Sure, we’re going from 2.4-litre V8s to four-cylinder 1.6-litre units, and reves have effectively been halved from what they currently are – but they’ll still be producing the same power poutput as the current generation of engines. Does no-one else find that impressive? I mean, isn’t this what Formula 1 is all about: cutting-edge technology rather than simply bolting on a few extra cylinders?

    Horsepower isn’t the only way to improve a car’s speed. A smaller engine is a lighter engine, so the car’s power-to-weight ratio will change. Likewise, it will be easier to optimise weight balance and centre of gravity because even if the cars need balast to achieve minimum weight, the teams will be able to place that ballast more effectively. And then there’s regenerative power devices like KERS and talk of ground effects coming back for 2013. If anything, the 2013 cars will be faster than the current ones.

    • Gwenouille said on 10th December 2010, 22:23

      I totally agree with you PM.
      I find this step quite impressive too. I can’t wait to see the lap times with this engines !
      Roll on 2013, all of that sounds pretty exciting !

    • Valentino said on 11th December 2010, 0:09

      Ok so what you’re saying is that you would allow an 500cc engine in an F1 car in 2015, in, lets say, 10 years an 100cc engine,..and later an electric engine?! And much later a solar charged battery engine?
      I like classic V8 and V10 engines,..they can make them to have less CO2 emission and to spend much less fuel that is no problem I guess..

      • Valentino said on 11th December 2010, 0:13

        And you are making me choose between a Mini (1.6l F1 car) and an Aston Martin (3.0l F1 car),…
        Just imagine getting into a F1 car and you feel the engine ripping your spine,..and an engine that sounds like a Toyota Prius,..

    • Jarred Walmsley said on 11th December 2010, 7:02

      Very true, I don’t mind the new regs as long as they allow any cylinder configuration, but I do think that maybe 2.0L V6’s would have been a good first step then to the 1.6L 4 cylinders, just to slowly get us used to them, but I think the loophole in the new regs that allows for any configuration could see some exciting new engines, as we could have traditional V4’s, straight fours and if VW group enter flat-4’s. It could make it very exciting,as the different config could allow for better weight distribution etc..

      • Burnout said on 11th December 2010, 18:49

        Will the power-to-weight ratio really change? I assume the minimum weight of the cars will still be around what it is today.

        Btw has there been any word on the orientation of the cylinders? It should be interesting to see a grid of flat-4s, straight-4s and V4s!

    • Exactly. We are getting more agile cars, so that is really something to look forward to.

  12. I can easily say that the 2013 cars will be significantly faster than this years cars.

    If you want sound go to a symphony.

  13. Not convinced personally. Making Formula 1 more ‘relevant’ and ‘green’ is a ridiculous notion; how can an engine designed for the mileage of five races be anything to do with the cars we drive year in, year out? Formula 1 is supposed to be beyond all that.

    I hope the full regs will allow at least some flexibility in bore/stroke and cylinder configuration. They will sound rubbish though.

  14. cyanide (@cyanide) said on 10th December 2010, 23:05

    What’s everyone think of ’13 F1 engine regs? 1600cc Turbo & KERS electric motor together producing over 700bhp – same speeds 35% less fuel!!

    Sounds like Cosworth are excited!

  15. LewisC said on 10th December 2010, 23:49

    I’m a simple chap, but I think this announcement has the terrible reek of greenwash. Let me explain:

    In road cars, smaller but turbocharged engines are ideal. My girlfriend’s car is a 1.4 155bhp turbo. When tootling along it uses not very much fuel, and when you put your foot down, it has the power you want.

    But in F1, you have your foot to the floor [i]all the time[/i].

    The power output of an engine is directly related to how much fuel-and air mixture you are burning at any given time. So a 4 litre normally aspirated engine at wide-open throttle produces the same power as a 1-litre one at wide-open throttle with a turbo (and fuelling) that means there is four times the concentration of fuel/air mixture in the cylinder (i.e the same amount as would have been in the MA 4-litre).

    So in F1 the economy in terms of miles per gallon won’t actually be any better than any other engine of XXXbhp!

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.