New engines are not much quieter than V8s – FIA

2014 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

The new 1.6-litre V6 turbo engines being used this year are not significantly quieter than the V8s they are replacing, according to the FIA.

The sport’s governing body estimates the maximum volume of the new engines is around 134 decibels, down from 145 last year.

It claims the new engines are louder than the typical noise level at the front row of a rock concert (110 decibels) and above the threshold of pain (130 decibels). At close quarters the difference in volume will hardly be noticeable, it added.

The FIA’s head of powertrain Fabrice Lom pointed out similar capacity engines have been seen in Formula One before:

“In 1988, V6 turbo F1 engines were revving lower and had less capacity. Ayrton Senna and Alain Prost both had fans in those days and the show, as far as we remember, was quite good.”

Concerns have been raised over the reduced volume of the new engines. Marussia team president Graeme Lowdon said: “I hope we don’t lose the magic that happens in the garage when you take the lucky few people into that environment.”

2014 F1 season


Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image © Red Bull/Getty

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

83 comments on “New engines are not much quieter than V8s – FIA”

  1. Not really worried about it. It seems it´ll just have a different tone to it.

    1. Most answers here seem to be from a TV viewer point of view, which is not what the topic is about. The real question should be from the point of view of the spectator at the track. For me, not wearing earplugs says it all about the sound of these new engines.
      Finally, it should feel that we are watching F1 and not Formula-E.

      1. Actually if you’re able to listen without earplugs then you’re gonna hear an awful lot more, so it’s a massive plus for the trackside spectator.

    2. The sound it makes at 1:56 driving by reminded me of an old Hit and Miss engine.
      (Listen: http://youtu.be/0w5OII6h504)

    3. I grew up hearing the screams of the V12s and the V10s on TV. Even watching on TV, the sounds were monstrous. It was obvious from just watching on TV that the sounds would be deafening on track. That is what got me hooked on F1. I have visited only 4 races in my lifetime. The 2004 and 2006 Malaysian GP and the 2012 and 2013 Canadian GP. The sound with the cars on track was exhilarating. You could hear them warming up from half a kilometer away. The ground shook and your heart raced when they passed by.
      That era is over. I am not alone in this. My entire generation (1990s to present) feel fairly let down by the new muted noises. Those people who grew up watching F1 from the 1980s have their nostalgia which helps to accept or even be excited for this new era of muted Formula 1. But I don’t have any such reason to welcome the new sounds. Nor do most of the people of my generation.
      Yes, I will continue to watch and follow F1. Maybe even go to some races if I get the chance. But to me, that special touch that F1 had, is gone. I will never again feel the thunderous roars and screams which gave me goosebumps every single time. It makes me sad to realize that for my generation, F1 is run as a politically correct eco-sport rather than an extreme sport run by passion.

      1. Please don’t speak on behalf of a generation which includes me. There is plenty wrong with F1; the change from what used to be a sport into what is now basically a motorsports themed reality TV show (thanks for that analogy @keithcollantine). But actually the noise is one of the least important parts of that. In fact, overstating the significance of such a peripheral and superficial consideration is EXACTLY the kind of dumbed-down mentality which has created this situation in the first place.

        1. I said most of my generation. You are one of the rare younger fans who doesn’t care about the noise.

          1. Where did you get ‘most’ from exactly?

          2. I don’t remember voting for you to represent me.

          3. An odd claim really considering according to your profile you only started watching F1 in 1999…

          4. If someone only started watching F1 fifteen years ago he can’t have an opinion of the V12 and V10? Who are you to decide? Me, I fell in love with F1 in 2004 and to me, the V10 is the best sounding engine ever. I don’t get excited either about the new sound of F1.. I’ve been to races a few Times, V10-era and V8.. V8 was a huge step back, V6 is a death wish..

          5. @rojov123 I’ll echo what @matt90 said as well as @mazdachris. Where do you get the ability to make an arbitrary claim such as “most of my generation” as someone from that generation though those engines were great so were the V8s of then and last year and from watching clips of testing these cars are quite loud and very similar to the 80s which had great sounds from what I’ve seen and heard.

            I grew up watching many different motorsports from 93 onward including f1 but didn’t follow it on my own until 96, and every year the engines have sounded wonderful and I don’t see why this year wouldn’t be the same. It seems to be more of an issue of size rather than function…which is quite sad on your part.

      2. ” F1 is run as a politically correct eco-sport rather than an extreme sport run by passion”

        I think Rooney spelled it out very well here. We fans love F1 for different reasons – I myself like Rooney obviously, fell in love by the magic, the noise, the goose bumps when the cars revs down the straights when at the grandstands at race week-ends and everything else related to the pinnacle of motor sport that F1 have been for me as well (from early -90’s up to 2013).

        Do not take me wrong, change is good and F1 need to develop as well. However, the FIA way to destroy the magic by ignoring us fans who loves just that…THAT makes me sad.

        I cannot understand why….
         the noise needed to be lower (could easily set the rev limit higher)?
         why eco-drive is a good thing in F1 (why do we have Formula E then)?
         we have the silly looks of 2014 cars (come on!)?
         we got double points rule (come on Bernie)?
         tyre mgmt is a good thing (Pirelli rules the show)?
         tyre blanket ban is a good thing?
         there are talks abt budget cap when the most expensive powertrain EVER is introduced?
         FIA do not bother to talk to the fans?
         F1 should be streamlined to align to other motorsport series?

        I will also follow F1 also but the magic is lost and I will not spend my money visiting the race venues any longer. The sport is now from 2014 nothing special – like any other football series or something. Sad times.

        1. Yeah, the new motors do not sound that great at all, only during the braking phase do the bells and whistles of the new drive train really stand out.

          I am only watching some of this year to observe the problems the teams have adapting to the new rules, trying to speculate as to the interests of the people in charge, and whether or not a few drivers stand out. It’s far worse in some other classes of racing, but not very different. The big disappointment for me in 2014 is SuperGT getting limited to 2 liter 4 bangers, … words just cant describe how disappointing that is.

          There is nothing to be gained by forcing people to run less fuel and smaller displacement motors; the only reason for this is to promote a philosophical agenda that has absolutely nothing to do with competition, racing or motor sports.

          1. @pcxmerc then you must really hate WEC P1 class

        2. I think you are underestimating the complexities of F1.

        3.  the noise needed to be lower (could easily set the rev limit higher)?
          The noise didn’t need to be lower, it is a by-product of producing a new turbo and ERS PU with similar maximum power to the old V8s. Just raising the rev limit would increase the torque and power to a level the FIA wouldn’t be comfortable with. Keeping the rev limit lower also aids reliability. Now that engines are number limited this is important. Engines being number limited and less prone to exploding makes it cheaper for the teams.
           why eco-drive is a good thing in F1 (why do we have Formula E then)?
          There were fuel limits in the ’80s too. FE is clearly so much more extreme that saying ‘why bother having it if F1 is a tiny bit eco’ is simply ridiculous. Also, the E does not stand for eco, it stands for electric, so FE doesn’t have the capacity to push ICE technology and economy, whereas F1 does. Making it more of a challenge in terms of economy is attractive for manufacturers, so is probably part of the reason that Honda are making a return and injecting some more variety next year. The cars will manage 8.5 mpg (using imperial gallons) in Melbourne- that is pretty impressive for such a high performance engine in a race.
           we have the silly looks of 2014 cars (come on!)?
          An unfortunate by-product of rules with loopholes that allowed teams to actually use aerodynamically beneficial mid-height noses (rather than the intended low ones) so long as they had a ‘finger’ attached.
           we got double points rule (come on Bernie)?
          Because he is an idiot determined to take away any sporting integrity from F1 before he finally loses his grasp and/or ends up in jail. Also Abu Dhabi almost certainly paid him.
           tyre mgmt is a good thing (Pirelli rules the show)?
          Because fragile tyres produced a great race in Canada 2011, and the old bulletproof tyres tended to produce slightly bland races. Pirelli were asked to make fragile tyres but went too far. I would hold off your complaints as they might not be much of an issue this year.
           tyre blanket ban is a good thing?
          I forget why, but why is it a bad thing either?
           there are talks abt budget cap when the most expensive powertrain EVER is introduced?
          F1 needed a change of engine. It couldn’t keep putting it off and running fairly irrelevant technology. So despite the need for spending cuts it had to be done. Which means that the expensive PU justifies spending cuts even more.
           FIA do not bother to talk to the fans?
          They have very little interest in what we have to say.
           F1 should be streamlined to align to other motorsport series?
          Again, the engines being shareable it more attractive for engine manufacturers to get involved. They could get their engines running in multiple series with minimum hassle and/or maybe give them a source of extra revenue. I assume that if LMP teams buy F1 engines it could drive down the price for F1 teams, although that is just my speculation.

        4.  the noise needed to be lower (could easily set the rev limit higher)?

          The noise didn’t need to be lower, it is a by-product of producing a new turbo and ERS PU with similar maximum power to the old V8s. Just raising the rev limit would increase the torque and power to a level the FIA wouldn’t be comfortable with. Keeping the rev limit lower also aids reliability. Now that engines are number limited this is important. Engines being number limited and less prone to exploding makes it cheaper for the teams.
           why eco-drive is a good thing in F1 (why do we have Formula E then)?
          There were fuel limits in the ’80s too. FE is clearly so much more extreme that saying ‘why bother having it if F1 is a tiny bit eco’ is simply ridiculous. Also, the E does not stand for eco, it stands for electric, so FE doesn’t have the capacity to push ICE technology and economy, whereas F1 does. Making it more of a challenge in terms of economy is attractive for manufacturers, so is probably part of the reason that Honda are making a return and injecting some more variety next year. The cars will manage 8.5 mpg (using imperial gallons) in Melbourne- that is pretty impressive for such a high performance engine in a race.
           we have the silly looks of 2014 cars (come on!)?
          An unfortunate by-product of rules with loopholes that allowed teams to actually use aerodynamically beneficial mid-height noses (rather than the intended low ones) so long as they had a ‘finger’ attached.
           we got double points rule (come on Bernie)?
          Because he is determined to take away any sporting integrity from F1 before he finally loses his grasp and/or ends up in jail. Also Abu Dhabi almost certainly paid him.
           tyre mgmt is a good thing (Pirelli rules the show)?
          Because fragile tyres produced a great race in Canada 2011, and the old bulletproof tyres tended to produce slightly bland races. Pirelli were asked to make fragile tyres but went too far. I would hold off your complaints as they might not be much of an issue this year.
           tyre blanket ban is a good thing?
          I forget why, but why is it a bad thing either?
           there are talks abt budget cap when the most expensive powertrain EVER is introduced?
          F1 needed a change of engine. It couldn’t keep putting it off and running fairly irrelevant technology. So despite the need for spending cuts it had to be done. Which means that the expensive PU justifies spending cuts even more.
           FIA do not bother to talk to the fans?
          They have very little interest in what we have to say.
           F1 should be streamlined to align to other motorsport series?
          Again, the engines being shareable it more attractive for engine manufacturers to get involved. They could get their engines running in multiple series with minimum hassle and/or maybe give them a source of extra revenue. I assume that if LMP teams buy F1 engines it could drive down the price for F1 teams, although that is just my speculation.

    4. …the statement by Mr Lom is just a desperate attempt to defend the rule change. He seems to under estimate the intelligence of us fans by throwing dB numbers as if we do not know that it is a logarithmic unit. Stand by a race track and compare. The magic is gone just as Marussia head Mr Lowdon feared. Sad times.

  2. 11 decibels is a pretty big difference!

    1. It is, I’m not an expert on decibels and it seems to be a hugely complex subject but I do know that it’s not a linear scale and an 11 decibel increase is equivalent to more than double the “loudness” regardless of how that’s defined. No doubt a decibel expert can explain further.

      I should point out that I don’t really care, 134dB is still loud and I have no concerns about the different sounds, from what I’ve heard so far they sound interesting and just as exciting.

      1. a 3db increase is equal to twice as loud. 11db is about 10 times louder. Crazy but hey…

        1. Thell the king he’s wrong. Tell ’em everyone

        2. If 3 is double, then isn’t 11 just under 16 times louder?

      2. 10dB means the power carried in the sound waves is 10x lower. But the perception of sound is not the same, and we perceive 10dB as roughly a factor 2.
        Also the new engines are running with 700Hz cylinder firing rate, compared to 1200Hz for the V8s, and the effect frequency response of hearing will make the 1200Hz seem a couple of dB louder again.

        1. @glennb, @tricky

          That’s exactly why I said “regardless of how that’s defined” because I’ve seen it as 3dB, 6dB and 10dB as approximations for double the loudness! Thanks for the extra science @tricky !

        2. Will having a single exhaust on this year’s cars make up the difference? Last year’s engines would have had 1200 exhaust strokes a second, but split between two exhaust pipes. This year’s engines have all 700 strokes going out through one pipe.

      3. And dont forget the Fletcher Munson loudness curves:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher%E2%80%93Munson_curves

        Sounds at lower frequencies have less apparent loudness than ones in the midrange where the ear is more sensitive. With the lower revs, this will further subtract the apparent loudness on top of the decibel reduction.

    2. Indeed, it’s a logarithmic scale so they will definitely be noticeably quieter. Not sure if my calculations are right, but I think the noise of the new engines will be a touch over 75% of the old ones. Obviously they only mention “maximum” volume, and I suspect the new engines will have a wider volume range than the old engines (which just seemed to be constant loud whine, with small changes in pitch).

      I’m more interested in how the new engines sound on TV. I’ve been to two live F1 races, one last year and one in 2011 at the height of the EBD. The sound live is so much different, much more enjoyable and less annoying than the mostly featureless scream you get on TV. The 2011 cars sounded amazing off-throttle, one of the most unique sounds I’ve ever heard – particularly the Lotus which basically sounded like an extremely loud and unhealthy chainsaw. Live, they sound angry, unpredictable and beast-like – on TV, they are annoying and a bit boring, if distinctive.

      The TV recordings never seem to have picked up any of that texture, and I’ve always presumed it was because of the ridiculous sound levels meaning the microphone sensitivity had to be toned down. Now the engines are quieter, I’m hoping the mics will pick up a lot more of the cool sounds these bizarre creations make.

      1. Actually if these new engines are quieter then it’s easier for mics to pick up the depth and texture of the sound as they can be turned up a bit in terms of sensitivity. I know what you mean about the cars sounding different in real life, and you get none of the pops, bangs and crackles on the TV, but for me it was still a hugely irritating and obnoxious sound which I won’t miss at all.

      2. My phone, my iPad and, a few years ago, my dad’s digital voice recorder were able to reproduce the tremendous sound of those cars in a much more convincing way than what I’ve ever heard on TV.. You’ll find that all YouTube “amateur” video you can find let you hear their sound much more vividly than what the FOM gives us..
        So it’s obviously not just a matter of microphone quality :( But then what? Pure incompetence on their part? I wouldn’t be that surprised, given the overall terrible quality of realization of F1 grand Prix those days (for example camera angles were usually much better 10 or 15 years ago IMO)

        1. I am a sound engineer and I’d like to chime in here.

          What you have from the FOM production is mediocre sound engineering. Basically, they use shotgun directional mics that automatically switch with the camera the director chooses, and also a constant “venue ambience” mic channel mixed into that audio feed at a lower level and left always on. The problem starts with the fact that shotgun directional mics do not pick up the reverberation of the environment in relation to the sound source they are pointed at. You can visualize this as looking at a landscape through a pinhole. Reverberation plays a huge part into what we perceive to be loudness and excitement, and it is why people that know F1 proper like those cell phone videos at taken at tests. They are more true to the reality of the environment. Even if the full frequency was captured properly by FOM, you’d need a hell of a speaker system to reproduce the full frequency sound properly at the decibel level experienced at the trackside. For the average person, that is impractical and cost prohibitive.

          Basically, FOM need to hire a better sound engineer to design a system that captures the “feeling” and “vibe” better than just your standard shotgun mics. This will vastly improve the TV viewing experience greatly.

          FOM, for a nominal fee, I am available for consultation BTW :)

          1. Thanks for the very interesting technical POV :) I hadn’t even thought about the directional microphones stuff …

            I almost wish I was wrong to blame the FOM ! But are they really the only ones to blame ? I can’t name any motorsport whose sound is properly reproduced … Maybe MotoGP is less worse than others but it’s still far from reality and far from what I get with my crappy smartphone mic … And I’ve never heard e.g. Nascar in real life but I’m sure they do sound much more impressive than what you get on TV

            In any case it’s a shame … Beside airshow and (I guess) rocket launches, motorsport events have to be the most amazing sound experiences in the world, and … we only get crap on TV :/

            BTW, aren’t there also big constraints in terms of sound compression for TV broadcasting ?

          2. @Julien the best sound production in motorsports is NHRA Drag Racing here in the US. They do a great job of capturing the emotional feel of the sounds.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1stzb2mewc

            its worth the commercial wait to hear how good their sound (and general) production is. Even better with good headphones.

            As for your question on compression, yes it can be detrimental but only if the initial capture and mixdown aren’t done right.

      3. Thanks mate for mentioning logarithmic scale, that’s the key point.

    3. Indeed when saying its less than 10% down in numbers, I am pretty sure that the FIA person who prepared this press release did not understand how Decibels work @mazdachris, @glennb, @jerseyf1.

      Now, Personally I do not see it as a big problem. People on TV won’t have a chance to notice, as their sound was muffled anyway to protect their ears. And on track I think the advantage is that you can hear interesting details from the car sounds and possibly do not need to use ear plugs all the time in the grandstands.

      1. @bascb, cynical me says the person who prepared that press release understood exactly how Decibels work.

        1. hm, good point there. This is FOM afterall

      2. I agree. I think the “loudness” is pretty ignorable. I mean, just talking about sound, volume doesn’t seem to me to be a s important as the …. I’m having trouble with words, tone? actual sound? ehh… I’m sure you get what I mean.

        But to summarize, volume, not that important I think.

    4. @mazdachris I am just wondering, with all this expertise of the engineers in F1, is is not possible to retain the loudness and other body vibrating effects of the V8’s in these new V6’s??

      I understand and support that we have to adopt newer technology. But let that new technology be stay hidden from the spectators (as the new engines and MGUs are hidden), but let the spectators enjoy the power that a F1 cars bring. I hope I was able to get my point across.

      1. If I understand what you’re asking, you want to know why they couldn’t make the new cars sound like the old ones?

        Well, there are lots of reasons.

        Firstly on the subject of ‘loudness’ measured in Decibels. Actually rather than loudness, what this specifically measures is sound pressure – or rather how energetically the air is being vibrated. Without getting too technical here, you need to think of an internal combustion engine as a big airpump – to generate a specific amount of power, a certain amount of fuel and air need to be mixed together and burned inside the engine, and then the expanded gasses are forced out through the exhaust. The more powerful the engine, the more air gets moved through it, and the more potential there is for noise. So we know that the new engines are a little less powerful, and we know that they are also more efficient. This means, put simply, that there is a significant reduction in the amount of air being cycled through the engines. Then you also have the addition of the turbocharger – the turbine is driven by the exhaust gasses, so some of the exhaust gas velocity is taken out of the equation before it leaves the exhaust, again changing the potential for sound pressure.

        That’s the reason why the loudness is reduced compared to before. As a general rule of thumb, if an engine is less powerful, there is going to be less noise, and if there’s a turbocharger (or a muffler or anything else) on the exhaust, then the noise will be quieter still.

        In terms of the actual pitch and tone of the sound, the reason for this is fairly complicated. But basically, the nature of the sound is measured in terms of frequency – you can think of this as being how close the soundwares are to one another. If they’re very close, then it’s high pitched, and if they spaced far apart, it’s a deeper sound. if you were looking at a speaker moving, you’d see a low bass note with the speaker vibrating slowly but moving through it’s full stroke length, whereas for a mid or upper range note, the speaker will be vibrating fast but not moving as far in and out. The air being moved by the speaker is moving in this same pattern, and that’s what you can hear. You need to think of the pistons in the engine as being like the speakers – the faster they are moving, and the more frequently the cylinders are firing, the higher pitched the sound. Very high RPM engines are like the speaker putting out a high treble sound – the pistons move very fast, over a fairly limited distance (because the crankshafts and conrods are kept as compact as possible to minimise rotational mass), whereas a lower RPM engine is more like the speaker making its midrange sound.

        But with engines you need to take the analogy a little further. Because the exhaust plays its part as well. For instance, the old V8 engines uses two exhausts (one for each bank of four cylinders) so this was more like having a pair of speakers rather than just the one. If you had all eight cylinders going into one exhaust, the characteristics of the sound are changed, because the resonance of one bank of cylinders would have an effect on the other. This happens with our new V6 engines. Actually in some respects this does bring the V6 sound closer to what we’re used so, because dynamically the frequency of pulses from the single exhaust being fed by six cylinders at 16000rpm is not that dissimilar to a single exhaust being fed by four sylinders at 18000. There’s some maths which underpins this, but it’s pretty complex. So in that respect they have produced a sound which is probably about as close as you’re going to get to what there was before. Hopefully this makes sense!

        The other thing is that, again, we have the turbocharger slowing the exhaust gasses down which has a muting effect on the noise. Think about the opening of ‘Iron Man’ with that distinctive sound of Ozzie Osbourne shouting through an electric fan. That’s what’s happening to the gasses as they’re going through the turbine.

        So the point I’m labouring towards is that the characteristics of the sound are created directly by the physical properties of the engine. They aren’t something which is specifically tuned to sound a certain way – they’re a natural consequence of the type of engine being used. Every type of engine sounds totally different, and one engine can’t be made to sound like another without physically altering the engine itself. And of course, the major question is why you would ever really want to? Form follows function; these cars are designed to be as fast as possible within the rules, and no part of the car is designed without that ethos in mind. There is not a single race car designer in the world who would genuinely put effort into making something look or sound a certain way if there wasn’t also some kind of performance benefit to be gained.

        1. @mazdachris Wow, what a piece you have written. Nobody could have explained it better. I now get a sense of it. The turbos and the MGUs do take a chunk away due to the energy transformation process.

          Take a bow

        2. COTD for me, thanks @mazdachris; I knew all this, sort of and to varying degrees, but reading it summed up into a logical treatise like you just did really helps a lot.

        3. That was fantastic. Thanks mate. :D

      2. But let that new technology be stay hidden from the spectators

        where’s the fun in that?

    5. @mazdachris you’re right , it’s the difference between a conversation and a rock concert.

      I don’t know how to answer the FIA but even though I prefer this to the V8 the 1988 turbos sounded awful! I think everyone still remembers the v10’s from 10 years ago so FIA obviously at the time the 88 turbo’s were okay.

    6. johnny stick
      12th March 2014, 0:48

      Yah this is the same math that gave us double points; 11 db is a lot! Does the FIA think we are just as dumb as NASCAR fans?

  3. They are definitely quieter – at least from my experience at Jerez.

    The V6s certainly sound ‘sweeter’ than the V8s did – and sound really cool under braking and switch off – and you can still hear the cars approaching from half way around a circuit. It’s just that when these new cars pass you, the sheer force of the sound doesn’t rock through your entire body like the V8s used to and there’s now less of a need for ear plugs when you’re spectating at the track.

    While I know that engine sound is a big factor for many fans, I actually think that given how futuristic and technically impressive these new engines are proving to be, losing the sheer volume of the V8 engines is really not too bad a price to pay to finally bring F1 into the 21st Century.

    1. Indeed, many people speak the cars need to be fast and advanced, and complain about their sound and looks.

      1. @austus Sounds and looks are important, else we would have Harry Potters lapping the circuits on broomsticks..

    2. I never wore earplugs, even stood on the bridge before Eau rouge. So loud,they made you laugh. It’s all part of the fun. These sound alright as well tbh.

    3. They weren’t running at full revs at Jerez.

  4. Do people that are worried about the loudness of the new engines actually go to the races? I think the bigger problem is being so far from the track now. The first race I ever went to I was standing at a guardrail less than 1 meter from the cars. The cars could be experienced that way. The last race I went to was Imola ’99 and I was in a bleacher some 300 meters away from cars that must have been outrageously loud, but the distance was for me the last straw.

    1. agreed 10000%. Looking to buy tix for the USGP but all the “normal people” seating is so far from the track. Most of the seating is at areas where the cars are at their slowest. Who wants to go to an F1 race to see the cars negotiating 50 mph turns?

  5. Loudness isn’t everything anyway. Sure, the old V8s were painfully loud, but it was a really, deeply unpleasant noise. I go to a lot of motorsports events and I reckon the only thing I’ve found more unpleasant on my ears than F1 cars were the jet powered funnycars at Santa Pod. For me, the sound of these new V6 engines is a huge improvement, and if they’re a little bit quieter, then even better.

    1. I agree, yes. The sound of these new engines makes for enjoyment hearing all the details in it, with a nice rough throaty base and the huffs, whizzes and wheeze of the whole thing being different between engines and teams.

  6. I hope they crank up the effects on TV so viewers hear all the growls, whines and (Renault) pops and bangs – these trackside videos sound fine, but the world feed could sound a bit lame – as the old 80s turbos did on TV, and current Indycars.

    Graeme Lowdon’s comment about “the lucky few” says a lot about F1’s self-importance and lack of access. Surely there is room to let some fans in among the tumbleweed in the massive concrete paddocks, and within a safe viewing distance of the pit lane. Hopefully Bernie’s successor will be more enlightened about this – someone with experience of US race meetings could be a good idea.

    1. Its rather that they don’t have to muffle them as much @tomsk. There are regulations on how loud a sound you are actually allowed to put on a TV show to protect listeners, so the sound of the cars has been toned down for us watching over TV for years now.

    2. The ‘lucky few’ are lucky because they get to go inside the pit garage as they start the car up, not necessarily because of their celebrity outside the world of F1

  7. Loudness and feeling the vibrations near you does make it really awesome though, but this is only true when you’re at the tracks. Until I listen to the new turbos ‘live’ then will I decide if I still prefer the V8s.

    For TV fans it doesn’t really matter at all as the V8s sounded so muted so there’s no difference.
    It’s the speed that I’m concerned about for this year on raceways, quail will be fine as it’s flat out.

    1. @johnbt Autosport did a comparison using Rosberg’s race stint in testing vs his 2013 race lap times, in the new car he started off slightly faster and ended up slightly slower (apparently he was in aggressive fuel saving at that point), and his tyres lasted around twice as long. It’s not a great comparison as it’s obviously different conditions and the Mercedes was horribly slow at Bahrain last year, but it at least shows they’re not far off.

  8. I think the pitch (note) of the engines is actually people’s main criticism. They don’t wail or scream in the way many want their F1 cars to do. I’m not a critic of the new sound but that’s my understanding of the criticism (maybe I’m wrong?)

    Plus, as mentioned above, 11 decibels is a big difference on what is a logarithmic scale.

    1. exactly, there is no scream. volume is a different matter (although still important of course)

  9. So that’s around half the perceived volume then. That’s a pretty big difference!

  10. The V8’s sounded like a bag full of rattley spanners. They were load, but not pleasant. These V6’s sound fantastic, a nice throaty sound engine note and the whizzing and whirring of the ERS and turbo certainly adds to the experience.

  11. I really don’t get the noise fuzz. Long time ago I witnessed a flyby of two jet fighters in a beach where I was camping. The speed and noise was amazing and I still can feel chills only remembering it. In that case noise equals power (I am pretty sure that the military would prefer a quieter jet). For me, F1 should be about speed and the noise only a side effect.

  12. Interesting non-F1-fan’s article on the US-based Wired magazine today – wired – autopia – 2014-f1-sound
    The first video has a “best” bit around 2:36… some good sounds from the engines at the Jerez test.

  13. Glad that 3db has already been covered in the thread. I recall reading something about when there was one car on the track during testing, the mechanics couldn’t hear it at times. It seemed to be reported as a change from the norm.
    These cars are a lot quieter, though it’s hardly a surprise. Less cylinders, lower rpm’s and a turbo in the exhaust pipe wasn’t going to end up louder than last year!

  14. If you watched any of the pre-season testing on TV one of the most common statements by the commentators and some of the spectators interviewed in the grandstands was that this years cars are much quieter and nobody needed to use any hearing protection and that included trackside viewing. I know this is not scientific, but the new power units are it is obviously much quieter than the old units. :-(

  15. I love that airplane turbine-like whine of the new V6s. Also, I wonder if people who miss the high-pitched scream aren’t fans of the sound of 80s engines either.

  16. I don’t get it. Nobody from my day gave a monkeys about the sound, just the racing. I’ve been through most engine eras and they’ve all been good. When you squeeze that much horsepower from a little box, good ear type stuff is going to happen. What I DO like is I can now tell the difference (again) between the engines. We always could before those darned homogenised V8’s – the Ferrari usually winning the sound battle with the Mercedes having an angry buzz saw tone. Out of the new engines, I would say it’s a toss up between Renault and Ferrari, with Ferrari just edging it. The Merc is just too metallic, for me anyway.

    A very good place to hear these up close and personal will be the Goodwood Festival of Speed this year.

  17. They might be quieter but they sound better, so to speak.

  18. There is a fundmental benefit of the engines being quieter, and that it hs less of an impact on the surrounding community. This a big plus in places like Melbourne where there is a very vocal anti grand prix movement.

    So if can be a little less annoying to the locals, that helps the goverment on retaining the race here. Which Bernie has indicated an extension to the existing conract is imminent.

    Either way i look forward to the new sounds when i am sitting in the grandstands on friday. I have heard the V10, the V12s and the V8s, I think these new engines are going to be just as spectacular.

  19. The FIA are every bit as comepentent in maths and science as they are shepherding a high-tech motor racing sport. The db scale is logarithmic, not linear, and the difference between 145 db and 134 db is enormous: ~350% in SPL and >1200% in intensity.

  20. Im just happy the EBD noise is gone, it was horrendous. Was so bad I turned DOWN the volume when watching F1. The new sound is quite pleasant to listen to, cant wait to hear them at full song from Melbourne :D

  21. Thanks Eco-hippies! in 20 years Formula 1 is gonna become Formula Prius

    1. Amen, brother. That’s what the V-6Ts are all about. F1 have sold its birthright to The New Green Religion in exchange for a temporary reprieve from its ire. The F1rius power plants are more expensive to build, more time-consuming to maintain, and do more eco-damage than did their purely dead dinosaur-powered predecessors. And we’re supposed to be all gobsmacked by a whopping 44 litres/100 km.

  22. When I was a kid, I attended my very 1st race weekend up at Watkins Glen. There was the 6 hour Manufacturer’s Championship race on Saturday, and a CanAm race on Sunday. I loved the sound of those thundering V8 McLaren and Lola CanAm cars, but I was particularly taken by the noises emitted by the 12 cylinder Porsche 917’s, Ferrari 312PB’s and 512’s during the endurance race. A couple years later I went to another CanAm meeting out in Edmonton, Alberta (yeah, I’m old!). I was pretty naive mechanically (and otherwise), and having fallen in love with that unique sound from the air cooled Porsche flat-12, I couldn’t wait to see and hear the new Penske/Donohue 917/30. This 1000-plus hp “turbocharged” monster must absolutely make the earth tremble! Well, to put it mildly, I was a bit surprised and disappointed with what I heard. It sounded like a vacuum cleaner in comparison to it’s naturally aspirated cousin. Fun race though. It was a while before I understood what a turbocharger actually does, and why it necessarily reduces engine noise. Anyway, I’m ok with the “new” sound of F1, but I’d be lying if I said that I don’t miss the symphony of different types of screaming motors from the past.

  23. Fabrice Lom mentions it’s a similar formula to the Prost + Senna era, V6 engine with a turbo bolted to it. We’ve all picked up on this, but what if Formula One took the ‘exact’ same regulations from 1980 and applied it to this season. How different would the cars that could be built now be from the cars of what was engineered and built in 1980?

  24. The fia are either thick or treating the fans as mugs. 10db less is a lot quieter, its half the loudness.

    Full details on the db scale can be found here http://www.cns.nyu.edu/~david/courses/perception/lecturenotes/loudness/loudness.html

  25. Professor Dr Thomas Weber, the Daimler board member responsible for research and development, said the engines provided the justification to continue.

    “The key challenge for the future is fuel economy and efficiency and with the change in regulations F1 is the spearhead for development,” Weber said.

    He said it had become “hard to explain” why F1 was using the old V8 engines.

    “Now with these new regulations I can clearly convince the supervisory board that the (F1 team) are doing exactly what we need – downsizing, direct injection, lightweight construction, fuel efficiency on the highest possible level, new technologies and combining a combustion engine with an e-motor hybrid.”

    It’s easy to understand people. Nowhere in the Formula 1 remit does it mention anything about noise. Noise is a by product. Would you just sit in your living room and listen to the race but not watch it? The actual racing is as exciting as ever and a true motorsport fan would look past the slightly quieter engines and see how these regulation changes are actually very important for the future of automotive in general. This harnessing of power to create incredibly fast machines is essentially saving motorsport and in general ‘fast’ cars for us all for years to come. Think of the bigger picture or in other words GET OVER IT

  26. Well this was wrong…

Comments are closed.