Formula One – Awesome?

This topic contains 7 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  newnhamlea1 7 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
  • #127778


    For the purpose of this thread awesome is defined as something that inspires awe.

    Formula One is currently awesome. Formula One before 2006 was even more awesome. I am of course referring to the types of engines that sit in the back of the cars. As the sports rulemakers put together a new engine formula for 2013, I hope they consider what I call ‘the awesome factor.’ The current rumours are that a 1.5 litre, 4 cylinder turbocharged spec is the favourite to replace the current 2.4 litre v8 formula. However is a small capacity, low revving, 4 cylinder formula really the best for what is meant to be the pinnacle of motorsport? As a motorist someone is likely to think “V10? thats amazing, il never have that in my measly ford focus” whereas if they see these new 1.4 litre, 4 cylinder engines, what will they think? ” i have a bigger engine than that, ive got a v6 and mines got a turbo”. What im trying to get at is they should really be focussing on something that has never been done before in motoring and thus should be focussing on regulations that reward technichal inovation rather than restricting engine developement to one specific route.



    Peronally I love how F1 is now. For me, this close title battle, brilliant selection of drivers and amazing races, makes me really not care that much about the lack of V10s or turbo’s.

    As long as it stays fast enough and we get racing like this I am happy.


    As much as I don’t want to see it happen, Formula One cant continue to claim that it has a role to play in future car design if its engines are so far from what are used by the majority of cars with no scope for innovation. BMW have said that a high percentage of the engines they make in future will be small capacity and turbo charged and even Ferrari are showing a willingness to use smaller engines in their road cars, remember they are backed by FIAT who make ‘regular cars’. the Turbo engines that could be bought in will by no means be short on power, in the 80s turbo cars where producing 900bhp in race trim 20 years ago so even with the reliability regulations in place the performance shouldn’t differ drastically.

    The best situation for me would be very restrictive fuel limits on the cars with less restrictive controls on capacity etc, allowing much more scope for innovation and development of fuel saving technology’s. This wouldn’t be as beneficial in cost cutting terms but surely there must be a way of controlling the money spent by manufacturers.

    In an ideal world I think almost everyone would like to see engine regulations completely opened up with only a limit of capacity. However with the current cost cutting initiative in F1 and a drive to improve its environmental credentials I cant see anything other than small capacity, turbo charged engines being used. F1 should be try to set apart from other engine design it can still have a degree of the ‘awesome’. The wailing sound of the current V8s will be missed but is the rumble of a turbo all that bad?


    Dan Thorn

    I don’t mind if we go back to small capacity turbo’s at all. If anything I think it will amaze the common man even more – “My car’s got a 1.5 turbo just like an F1 car, but that develops 800bhp and mine only 100!”

    Also personally I think the turbo’s sounded great in the 80’s. Ideally of course EVERY team would use either a Ferrari V12 or a BRM V16 for the perfect aural experience.



    Would is be a crazy idea to let in other type of fuels, like diesel and various bio-fuels? Not only that. If a team wanted to take a crack at an electric motor, let them have a crack at it? I definitely think Forumla One engines should reflect what the automobile industry is doing and where they want to be going. I think that’s why there’s a descent amount a manufacturer interest in sportscar racing, because the various series give them more freedom to go in the direction they want to go.



    I’m all for technical freedom. limiting internal combustion capacity is fine, just open everything else up: turbo, supercharger, alternative fuels… although I have to wonder what kind of crazy, unstable rocket fuel some team would come up with. Ground effects (limit the area available).

    And I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of limiting the amount of fuel per race: it will force technical innovation in fuel savings and outcomes will be really interesting at the end of the race.



    Well look at it this way, eventually F1 cars will be powered by various kinds of electric engines. Don’t know what sound a hydrogen engine makes, the bus in London roars a bit, but enjoy internal combustion while you still can I say.

    Im all for changing the engine regs comabtive R+D departments struggling for performance are not only usefull to the industry but fun to compare.



    ignore that, wrong thread.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.