I'm guessing it's something that regulates the flow of fuel into the engine. I imagine different rates of fuel flow would affect the engine's ultimate performance.

A new spec for tires can help with that.



Or maybe it's related to controlling the amount of fuel used.
Also, there were talks about the IC engine being shut at some race procedures, like pit stop and others.

As Captain Tightpants said, it's to limit the maximum fuel flow rate to a specific level. Basically it's a bit like a smaller fuel tank but more sophisticated.

so if some engine reaches 650 hp, but will exeed fuel flow limit, it will be tuned down?

I like my racing cars angry, already this year they have too much grip and not enough power IMHO. they also sound gutless. Go to Youtube and fire up a race from 2004 or something, man ... they sound like they are goinna detonate at any second.

Sounds good to me.

What's the purpose of moving the sidepods?

Don't mind the emphasis on ground force, maybe things will be safer this time. The ground-force era was way before my time, I'm still trying to find a video of Keke Rosberg's onboard lap around Silverstone that everyone always talks about (which was the pinnacle of the GF era apparently)

You know what I'd like to see, this is just a random thought I'm throwing out. A return(?) of water cooled fan radiator engines. I know it doesn't make much sense considering the speeds involved, but I'm sure they'd increase efficiency with the amount of drag reduced by having smaller sidepods as a result. Or maybe not. Plus it's relevant as you don't get pure air cooled cars hardly, could also lead to applications with HERS (Heat Energy Recovery Systems) oh and Button won't retire cos his mechanic left some piece in the side pod, or maybe that would still happen.

At the risk of sounding like a clown because I know nothing about aero, but if more downforce from the diffuser = a kind of ground effect and is better for passing, why on earth there's so much debate about the DDD? Isn't the DDD supposed to add downforce and ruin passing?

Besides producing downforce diffuser produces dirty air behind the car - and nowadays cars rely very much on wing-produced downforce, so huge diffuser not only gives a lot of grip, but also makes following the car difficult. If we had (almost)no wings and huge diffusers I think it would be much easier and this is my hope for 2013

No, the DDD has very little effect on the overtaking capabilities of the cars.

And a 650BHP 4 cyl turbo is gonna suck...it's like a Mitsubishi Evo engine

Four cylinder? That's pathetic. Six at the minimum. And 650HP is no way near enough.

I do like the proposals on a much more powerful KERS system, if this technology is going to be integrated into the sport then it makes sense to use it to add 150 horsepower. I know some may just disregard it as an attempt to let Formula One remain "relevant" to an automotive world which is increasingly "going green" , but if F1 wants to have advanced technology then energy recovery such as KERS is the sort of thing that is going to be the future. This system should prove to be much more useful than the current more limited KERS, as well as giving extra speed not dependent on aero for once.



So is this meaning that cars will run fully on KERS going through the pits?

The DDD creates more dirty air/turbulence (allegedly) than a single decker would, it wouldn't be so much of a problem if the cars didn't generate much downforce from the wings, which are affected the most by turbulent air, but they still rely on them quite alot and so the cars get affected more.

If you had cars which purely or nearly purely generated all the downforce from the floor/diffuser, then it wouldn't be as much of a problem because I've heard that the floor/diffuser isn't really effected much by turbulent air and wake. So the cars can follow each other with less issue.

I'm not sure what the current % figures are for varying sections of the modern car in terms of downforce generated. I've heard the front wing contributes upto a third of the total downforce so there's still a lot of reliance on wings.

I think you'd have to have a wingless total Ground effect car if you want to get rid of the wake/following problem (and if you want to keep speeds up to F1 standards) but it's dangerous stuff as you're putting all your eggs in one basket, so if the car bottoms out you lose everything and you go flying off, this is why it was banned in the first place.

That's the idea.

Yeah I get it now. Tks.

It's enough.

auto industry term would be "fuel pressure regulator" i believe

Not for the grip that they'll most likely have. 800HP minimum. And no fuel tank restrictions.

On which subject, I received the excellent McLaren - The Cars 1964-2008 book recently. In there it lists the power outputs of the various cars throughout their history.

All are bhp, I would assume race figures.

1966: 321 & 260 (Ford & Serenissima) 3.0L
1967: 280 (BRM)
1968: 410 (DFV)
1969: 425
1970: 430
1971: 440
1972: 450
1973: 460
1974: 460
1975: 465
1976: 465
1977: 465
1978: 465
1979: 470
1980: 470
1981: 470
1982: 480
1983: 750 (TAG V6) 1.5L Turbo
1984: 750
1985: 750
1986: 750
1987: 850
1988: 900 (Honda V6)
1989: 685 (Honda V10) 3.5L
1990: 690
1991: 720 (Honda V12)
1992: 740
1993: 640 (Ford V8)
1994: 740 (Peugeot V10)
1995: 680 (Mercedes V10) 3.0L
1996: 700
1997: 720 - 740
1998: 760
1999: 785
2000: 795
2001: 810
2002: 825
2003: 860 - 885
2004: 895 - 910
2005: 920
2006: 735 (Mercedes V8) 2.4L
2007: 765
2008: 765

Then don't assume a given grip.

They're not going to let the grip fall below today's figures otherwise F1 will lose its appeal as the fastest motorsport, and the cars already have a far too low power:grip ratio as it is. Slashing the power by 15% would be disastrous.

More power just compensates for bad driving.

I hate the limited KERS, this is just to avoid further development of KERS.

If this were truly innovative, they would design the formula to stall combustion engine development and promote energy recovery development.
Ideally, they should only carry enough fuel to use unlimited KERS for both power and fuel savings in a good balance, putting it on the driver to use it as necessary.

The whole point of this is to attract manufacturers, who need to justify the ridiculous F1 budgets to boards of directors. Currently, despite intense R&D, very little tech in a F1 car is useful to a road car.
No F1 aero technology will ever make it to a family car.

oops.

I disagree with you on every point here, other than the power:grip ratio, on which I've opined upon many times.

And F1 hasn't always been the fastest circuit based motorsport - to no particular detriment.

Are you not mixing that up with his 1985 pole lap, which was the fastest F1 lap ever until Montoya's 2002 Monza pole?
GF was long gone in 1985.

It's no good, I can't take it any more.

Ground FORCE ('97 - '05):



Ground EFFECT ('77 - '82):

The big point is not about rear grip being generated from the underside, but front downforce being generated from the underside.

The diffuser creates no front downforce. Undercar Venturi's would. Front downforce created from the underside does not fall off nearly as bad as downforce created by the front wing when running in turbulence.

Coffee GROUNDs 2010



GROUND round , $3.99/lb

Was Ground Force any good?

Anyhow, 650 hp doesn't sound much at first thought. Isn't that what GP2 have now?

I would prefer 750hp + 150hp(KERS) = 900hp (for 30 seconds) but I guess I'm greedy

why greedy, to me it sounds like quite reasonable expectatins!

I believe this may be the reason for wanting to move the sidepods forward.

About 580 bhp at 10,000 rpm, according to wikipedia anyway.

688 kg without the driver - say circa 750 kg with.

Looking at power:weight ratios a GP2 car is773 bhp/tonne, the 2013 F1 car would be 1000 bhp/tonne assuming 650 bhp and 650 kg

I think it is for safety reasons...

Haha, I know I made the mistake as soon as I said that. I couldn't be bothered to change it. Ground Force is ok though. I mean....well, ok

Personally, I'd prefer 400hp(ICE) + 400hp(Electric) + 150hp(KERS - Push to pass) = 950hp.
How greedy I am?

Is this an actual proposal ?

At the moment, the underbody, eventhough it is flat, does make some downforce due to the air being accelerated under the car due to the cars splitter just in front of the driver.

Moving the sidepods forward may have the effect of moving the centre of downforce generated by the underside forward.

Personally I think a move to limited sized Venturis is the way forward. It still allows for the cars to have a reasonable level of downforce with the cars maintaining a lot more downforce when running in turbulence. Best of both worlds.



On the engine issue. I give a big fat no to KERS and to any engine which is producing under 800bhp under the new engine specifications.

I'd propose a nice 2L turbo. Limit the engine to a V6 max. Limit the power on the engine via a pop off valve for engine boost.

Here's the clever part though.

Give the cars 1000bhp or more on the slow circuits. Why not ? The FIA can then set different pop off valve settings for the faster circuits. Monza's power output could be limited to only 750bhp for instance.

I agree the would be really mean, but I'd like to watch how the same engine spec - with its different maps and gearing - would fare in another tacks as well.

30 seconds of KERS is a huge time, remember. Think about that over a regular lap. They'd need to activate it some other way besides pressing a button though, doesn't seem right that a driver is pressing a button for 30 seconds a lap.

They'd have to be quite hefty systems, these new KERS. Then again, 2013 is a long way and a long time to develop such a beast.

Press it just once and it's activated.

So everything will come down to a Tour de France stage in the plains
The riders will sandbag and keep all energy and release it in a raid 500 meter to the finish line.

If these changes go through, it will be a bleak period for F1 ...and after a few years the powers that be (faced with declinging attentence/interest due to anemic engines and lack of sensory excitment) will abandon this disengenous preoccupation with 'relavance' and a new, more visceral era will return with much fanfare.

I wish we could just avoid this process altogether...

Agreed.

Personally, I don't mind KERS too much. I hate the fact though that it is being used as a push to pass button.

Push to pass is ****ing awful. Push to pass is to motorsport what multiball is to football.


KERS would only be acceptable to me if the system was not to be used by the driver but was used by a computerised differential system to feed power in as it sees fit.

Give KERS absolutely no limit in terms of energy storage and leave the teams also regain energy from exhaust heat.



If anything, F1 is thinking about this all wrong. They are doing it as petrol engine with aid from KERS. It should be the other way around.

Give KERS no energy limit and the KERS system could be the base system. KERS could power cars through every slow corner on a circuit with the petrol engine kicking in when more power is needed or if the batteries have become drained.

Maybe its to increase the crumple zone to increase safety for the driver.

I like the idea of Ground Effects as it may well aid overtaking. The less downforce that is created by the wings, the better cars can follow each other. If most downforce is created from beneath the car, the less dirty air there is from the car behind to suffer from, I read that the wake from the car infront doesnt lower the grip generated by ground effects much. The less aero-wings dependence the cars have, the easier they can follow each other closer.

What I dont like is that KERS / PUSH TO PASS button. People want to see overtakings done on merit, overtakings should happen because the overtaker has outdriven the guy infront, not because he pressed a button at the right time. Think of all the great overtaking maneuvres you can remember from the past, they would not have been great if it would have happened by the aid of an overtaking-button, they would not have been real / on merit overtaking moves based on skill and great archievement. Everybody can press a overtaking button, there is no skill in that and makes overtakings have no meaning.

Its also quite stupid and pointless for every driver to have to press a button for 30 seconds, so on nearly every straight for every single lap. At Monaco, thats having the finger pressing the button for over half an hour in total. Thats just silly. Cant they find a way to let KERS get into the power output continuesly and automatic, without the driver having to manually press the button all the time.

How about push button once for on, lift off throttle or brake for off? Wouldn't be as much of a pain in the arse for the drivers then.

Ground effect, turbos set for F1 return


This could be... interesting.

EDIT: My bad, I see this is already being discussed... but I'll leave the Autosport link.

This solves some of our doubts.

all is fine, but I can't get over 650bhp

Considering the amount of downforce modern F1s have, anything under 1000hp is pathetic, 650 is even ultra pathetic.

Great news to see a possible return to ground effects.

That and elongated sidepods will at least make the cars look somewhat better.

A rendering of it would be really nice.

time for another Gordon Murray design...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...46B_Fan_car.jpg


perhaps not