Louder Engines "Essential" for Formula One in the Future According to Wolff

[Justin Davis]

Nope. For this exists the Formula E.

Electric power is where the automotive industry in general is headed. No use in pretending it's not going to happen eventually. As a motorsports fan you can trust I'm not happy about it, but the forward march of technology moves on regardless of what we like or prefer. Just like the arguments against aero in the late 60's/early 70's.

And the whole Formula E argument doesn't hold water. Why would there only be one series with electric motors? Should there be no other series that use petrol engines right now because F1 runs them? At some point electric motors will be the norm and not the exception, and that point is not going to be in the distant future, either.

I hope that internal combustion engines stay a major part of motorsports for as long as they possibly can, but I'm not going to kid myself. Once they are phased out of consumer vehicles what incentive would manufactures have to still design and use them in their race vehicles?

 

[BhZ]

I think it is a bit sad how modern motorsport has gotten into this hybrid situation. In the past the teams and series used to choose engines based on what is fastest on track. Nowadays it seems to be all about finding something that is as close to your normal road car engine. No matter how expensive and poor suited it is for racing usage. I think it is completely wrong approach and is hurting f1. F1 should be about exciting tech - not about putting road car tech into f1.

The modern f1 cars are obese. Overweight. Slow. There is about 100kg of electronics that just add weight to the car without even producing enough performance to offset their own weight. Remember when f1 first introduced the kers system? After one season everybody agreed to drop it because it made the cars slower and increased costs. It is the same thing again with the hybrid engines. Extremely expensive, slow and weight a ton. And boring. Fuel efficiency is not exciting. You could take out all the hybrid engine nonsense out of f1 car and drop the old v8 and make the car faster, cheaper and exciting. The weight saving alone would save seconds of single lap time and minutes from full race length. And would not sound like leaf blower.

I think it is wrong to assume that f1 for whatever reason needs hybrid engines. I think it is completely wrong to get so fixated on the engines. There is a lot more to f1 car than the engine. We all know the future is self driving electric cars. The path f1 has taken has only one ending: self driving electric cars. Does anybody want that?

F1 needs engine that is cheap so all the teams can afford to buy engines. F1 needs engine performance parity to improve the racing. F1 can't survive if the only way to be competitive is to be factory ferrari or mercedes team. And the engine needs to be exciting. Putting road car engines into f1 cars is not exciting. Fuel efficiency is not exciting.

So here is my engine rule proposal. Everybody can sell engines in f1. No tech rules at all. Anything goes. Double turbo 2 litre v12, na 4 liter pushrod straight 6 or fully electric duracell powered lawnmower with windmills and lasers. But there is a catch. An engine manufacturer must sell their engine to anyone and everyone who wants to buy it. At fixed cost of 5 million per season. No more, no less. If more teams want to buy your engine than you can make them then you need to find a supplier to build more engines. Everybody must use the same fuel and that fuel is designed to be as eco friendly as possible. Lubricants are free. And all teams must use the same engine spec. No more selling year old engines. No more running the latest spec engine in your factory team cars while everybody else is months behind. No fuel flow limits, no fuel cell limits (no refueling though). Just minimum weight, fixed price and no choosing of customers.

Honestly that's a bad idea. No one would have a reason to research and develop a new engine since everyone will run with the same one: the fastest. The hybrid system in F1 is far from being a road car technology. Refueling still means fuel management, so that's a bad idea as well. Many people should start to realize that even though some things seem cool in their mind, in real life they can't work. F1 has a well defined recipe and it won't change direction. We'll never see f1 with self-driving cars, that would be ridicolous. Imho, hybrid should remain. Speaking of refueling: the more factors you add in a pit stop, the more relevant it becomes. Refueling means that you have more reasons to not overtake someone in front of you because of different fuel strategies. F1 is about improving technology and giving ourselves regulations to help us to focus on what's important and usable on future road cars. F1 will never be a fair competition. The money spent are a lot and richer teams will almost always prevail. You can limit the budget, as they did, but not too much because f1 must remain the pinnacle of motorsport. If you want a competition where everyone has the same engine, just look somewhere else, this is not the place for you, it has never been. Last but not least, the sound is important but not as much as it is efficiency, durability, reliability. I wouldn't sacrify those for the sound. It's not worth it.

 

[Tony]

the best technology is inevitably going to be all-electric, so...whatever.

And that's the day I stop watching F1

 

[Tony]

do i need to spell it out for you? it isn't about what you want, it's about what mercedes/audi/toyota/ferrari/etc etc etc do. internal combustion engines aren't going to be powering cars for much longer. fans of top level autosport have to adapt to new sounds, tragedy that it is.

You have to be kidding? Once the crowds start to completely diminish because the cars sound like crap just watch them bring the sounds back. It is all about what the fans want and if it isn't then it bloody well should be.

 

[Terry Rock]

I loved the sound of the V10 and V12 of the past..
While the new Hybrid will never match those sounds for sheer audible 'rawness', I do like it as well.
I've always been a big fan of turbos, so the 100K+ MGU-H spooling on corner exit is great as well.
The deep growl and unstable combustion pops of moderm F1 machinery is not all bad.

 

[kondor999]

Here's the problem for all-electric racing believers: Energy Density.

Regular gas = 12,200 Wh/kg
Li ion battery = 255Wh/kg (up to 320Wh/kg by year 2020).
F1 ICE efficiency = ~50%

That means you need about 20kg of battery to hold as much energy as 1kg of gas. And unlike a kg of gas, when you deplete the battery, you can't simply "pour in" more energy. You either have to swap cars (what FE does) or else devise some kind of quick-change battery pack tech.

Also, you have to keep lugging around the depleted portion of the battery, unlike gas which burns off as you go, making the car progressively lighter.

All-electric cars with even half the power output of current F1 cars would be incredibly heavy if you wanted any sort of range out of them. It will take an as-yet-undiscovered materials science + basic physics breakthrough to address any of this.

It's also really interesting to run the numbers on a 2017 F1 car without the very heavy ERS system. IIRC, it's a significant net loss in terms of lap times when you calculate the benefit of having the extra power of the ERS against the fact that every extra kg costs you lap time.

The FIA has artificially incentivized the value of ERS by steadily increasing the minimum weight of the entire car, as well as strictly dictating the weight of the PU as a whole. They've contrived a situation where you "might as well" include the ERS because the minimum weight rules ensure you'll have to pay for it anyway in terms of weight.

But yeah, if you put a 760hp 2.4L ICE-only PU into these 2017 F1 cars and let them actually take advantage of the weight differential, the cars would be significantly faster than these hybrids we have now.

 

[Justin Davis]

Here's the problem for all-electric racing believers: Energy Density.

Are you under the impression that battery technology will not advance from where it is now or something?

 

[el chasco]

Electric power is where the automotive industry in general is headed. No use in pretending it's not going to happen eventually. As a motorsports fan you can trust I'm not happy about it, but the forward march of technology moves on regardless of what we like or prefer. Just like the arguments against aero in the late 60's/early 70's.

And the whole Formula E argument doesn't hold water. Why would there only be one series with electric motors? Should there be no other series that use petrol engines right now because F1 runs them? At some point electric motors will be the norm and not the exception, and that point is not going to be in the distant future, either.

I hope that internal combustion engines stay a major part of motorsports for as long as they possibly can, but I'm not going to kid myself. Once they are phased out of consumer vehicles what incentive would manufactures have to still design and use them in their race vehicles?

The Formula 1 needs to preserve the ICE because is the essence, instead looking tech for road application.

And why not hydrogen ICE?

 

[paracletus]

It is essential to have a fearsome sound, but fear not - Brawn is onto to (change by 2020). F1 is as much about the machines as it is about the racing. No incentive to go to watch a live GP without some sound, sorry.
The v8s were incredible, and v10 & v12 even better. Nothing quite like it.
These current ones sound just like a moped.

 

[Ghoults]

Honestly that's a bad idea. No one would have a reason to research and develop a new engine since everyone will run with the same one: the fastest.

Manufacturers love building their own engines and would keep doing so becasue of branding. But when you are enforcing engine performance parity and fixed price point it would prevent f1 from becoming engine dominated series while at the same those changes would allow basically every team to have totally unique engines. It is literally complete freedom to choose whatever you want. Of course in reality it needs little more detailed rules to rule out dangerous materials for fire safety and so forth..

Things would eventually converge towards more similar solutions and non-manufacturer teams surely would try to make sure they get the fastest engine. But I don't think it would ever lead to everyone using the same engine. And even if it would where is the harm? The engines are already very close to each other and the differences are rather minimal. And it has been this way for a long time. The v8 engines already were practically identical and the racing was excellent.

With this kind of engine rules we could see huge variety in engines. Some teams may go for fuel thirsty engines that produce more power but need to carry a lot more fuel. Someone might go for a light car. And someone goes between the two. Different circuits would suit different engines and you would have more winners. Also it would make the 3 tire rule per weekend more exciting as the softest option is not such a no.brainer as it is now. Heavier cars might prefer harder rubber for example.

The hybrid system in F1 is far from being a road car technology.

It is all about road relevance. Sure the hybrid tech requirements for f1 are totally different than for a road car but it is still all about putting road car tech into f1. Not the other way around. Not good for f1 because the hybrid engines are overweight and make the car slower compared to non.hybrid engines. Also more expensive, more complex and the grid is more locked down to different performance levels by ferrari and mercedes.

Refueling still means fuel management, so that's a bad idea as well.

Which is why I said no refueling...

Many people should start to realize that even though some things seem cool in their mind, in real life they can't work.

It is overly simplified proposition on my part and it is definitely not a complete one. Would it work or not? I think you need to provide deeper analysis than just saying "it won't work" without even giving any reasons why. And you have not even given any. Instead you address points I never made (refueling). Or address points that are completely the opposite what I'm suggesting (spec engines)!

F1 will never be a fair competition. The money spent are a lot and richer teams will almost always prevail. You can limit the budget, as they did, but not too much because f1 must remain the pinnacle of motorsport. If you want a competition where everyone has the same engine, just look somewhere else, this is not the place for you, it has never been.

I'm proposing completely free technical rules for engines and you say I want all cars to have the same engines? Did you even mean to respond to my post? I never even suggested limiting budgets either. Engine manufacturers could spend as much money as they want but they'd still need to sell their engines for 5 million per season to anyone who asks.

Last but not least, the sound is important but not as much as it is efficiency, durability, reliability. I wouldn't sacrify those for the sound. It's not worth it.

Sound, reliability and durability can co-exist. And the reason reliability is important is because of costs. But on its own reliability is meaningless.

The reason I did not mention any reliability requirements is because with the fixed price it is unnecessary. If someone can sell 30 engines per season for 5 million while other engine manufacturer tries to do it with 6 engines then let them do it. In the end the teams spend as much money in engines in both cases. 5million per season. This would also get rid of the stupid engine change penalties.

 

[Dan ONeill]

I've just got to say that they really don't sound that bad! The TV doesn't do them justice, never has..
I went to the pre-season testing in Spain and they sounded awesome, just need to get a little closer

 

[BhZ]

I'm proposing completely free technical rules for engines and you say I want all cars to have the same engines? Did you even mean to respond to my post? I never even suggested limiting budgets either. Engine manufacturers could spend as much money as they want but they'd still need to sell their engines for 5 million per season to anyone who asks.

Why would anyone work on an engine and spend millions in R&D when everyone in the end will have your engine for a 10th of the price (or even less than that)?

Not good for f1 because the hybrid engines are overweight and make the car slower compared to non.hybrid engines

If the car goes 20 km/h slower in a turn is not a big problem. You, as a spectator, would barely notice that. Speed makes things more exciting for the drivers, not the spectator. In fact cars way slower provide, usually, a more spectacular racing style. Hybrid technology is step in the future and ignoring it just because it's a bit heavy is just stupid. I've been at Monza in 2015 and the cars sounded quite well and they were extremely fast.

 

[Knoxstar]

Please have a look at this. For an entirely different reason, I think hybrid and possibly electric is not the way to go. These engines (hybrid) are incredibly complex judging by current F1 and electric may win the battle in the city but at Wolff said, racing is as much an audio experience as it is visual. In fact for those friends who are not convinced that being at a race trackside is bloody mind blowing I describe it as an attack of all your senses.
Hydrogen is not only an easy conversion but they could do it inside of a year with the required conversion below. Electric requires charging which requires hydro (until such time as they self charge w/o an internal combustion engine) and many countries are all ready using more than they are producing and the U.S. is importing hydro already.
Hydrogen is renewable, it is environmentally safe (produces H2O as a bi-product. It is much cheaper overall and if you are talking refill vs. recharge it takes about as long to refill as gasoline currently......and no I do not have shares in a hydrogen production company. Oh and BTW, they sound lovely.

Adaptation of existing engines
The differences between a hydrogen ICE and a traditional gasoline engine include hardened valves and valve seats, stronger connecting rods, non-platinum tipped spark plugs, a higher voltage ignition coil, fuel injectors designed for a gas instead of a liquid, larger crankshaft damper, stronger head gasket material, modified (for supercharger) intake manifold, positive pressure supercharger, and a high temperature engine oil. All modifications would amount to about one point five times (1.5) the current cost of a gasoline engine.[11] These hydrogen engines burn fuel in the same manner that gasoline engines do.

The power output of a direct injected hydrogen engine vehicle is 20% more than for a gasoline engine vehicle and 42% more than a hydrogen engine vehicle using a carburetor.

 

[Harry308]

They need to sound like the F1 cars of the 1980's.... LOUD & WITH MASSIVE REVS!! simple.

Electric cars should never be race cars, they are a joke!
It makes me laugh every time I see them racing, Lol! Racing for geeks!

 

[kondor999]

Are you under the impression that battery technology will not advance from where it is now or something?

Of course it will. But are you at all familiar with the underlying technology? Or are you making assumptions based on your experience with things like chip design and Moore's Law? To get much beyond 320Wh/kg of electrical energy storage, you're going to need something entirely different than what we have today. So, it's not just a matter of refinement.

Moore's Law doesn't apply here, any more than it applies to designing a nuclear weapon. Substantial (>50%) improvements in energy density will not be just a matter of process improvement. It will require something new.

Read some white papers and prepare to have your expectations lowered considerably. Did you know that the energy density of old NiMH batteries (used in many of the 1st and 2nd gen Hybrids) is considerably better than what's in the very latest Li ion batteries? That's after 25 years of relentless development, and still you have considerable compromises (essentially, they traded away raw energy density for a host of other advantages such as low self-discharge rate and increased voltage output).

Two steps forward, one step back is not what people these days expect when it comes to most items of technology. The difference is that battery design is constrained by some fairly inflexible laws of physics.

It's also worth remembering what I was taught in Engineering:

There's a name for what happens when you concentrate a tremendous amount of energy into a small space:

A Bomb.

 

[InsaneOzzie]

The LOUDER the better!!!
Can you imagine going to a NASCAR race, without hearing the raw sounds of the monster V8's that power them. Same could be said about the Aussie V8 SuperCars, I for one as an Aussie would be totally against a hybrid engine in my beloved V8 series.

And don't get me started on electric applications, as they are a joke, the fact you have to charge them using fossil fuel generated electricity (in most cases) is just ridiculous.

If your on about hybrid they still use fossil fuel as part of the power generation process, if you want to save the planet from global warming, stop cutting down so many bloody rain forrest's, after all trees are the biggest supplier of atmospheric oxygen known to man, and the lack of them is a major factor in CO2 increases.

This hybrid/electric solution to our global warming problem is just another money grab IMO.

But hey I'm ranting and going, going, gone off topic, LOUD is good

 

[Ghoults]

Why would anyone work on an engine and spend millions in R&D when everyone in the end will have your engine for a 10th of the price (or even less than that)?

F1 engine sales and development is not about selling engines. Unless mercedes and ferrari were forced to neither of them would sell engines to anybody. Building an engine for the car is one the main things every manufacturer wants to do in f1. It is not a massive change in cost anyways. I'd argue it would be cheaper simply because the tech would be less complex and manufacturers already have budgets in place which is decided by completely other reasons than how much it makes sense to spend on f1 engine development so you can get your money back. It is all about making your brand look strong so manufacturers can sell more road cars. That's where they make the money back. Not in f1 engine sales...

If the car goes 20 km/h slower in a turn is not a big problem. You, as a spectator, would barely notice that. Speed makes things more exciting for the drivers, not the spectator. In fact cars way slower provide, usually, a more spectacular racing style. Hybrid technology is step in the future and ignoring it just because it's a bit heavy is just stupid. I've been at Monza in 2015 and the cars sounded quite well and they were extremely fast.

Hybrid design has several flaws. One is the weight which makes the cars heavier and easier to drive because the cars react more slowly. The electronics of the hybrid engine makes the cars easier to drive because the electronics allow the cars to have different levels of torque at different gears, at different corners (based on gps), based on trillion other bits of telemetry. The torque curve is filled to be totally smooth using the electric motor.

The way the electric power is discharged is also an issue. All the electric energy is discharged in corner exits which means the cars accelerate really fast to their top speeds. This fast acceleration is almost given how much of it is controlled by electronics so getting good exits out of corners is easier than ever before. But in turn this will also kill drafting on the straights. Because the hybrid engines dump all the power on corner exits there is nothing left to use in the mid and latter part of the straights. Unless you have drs the cars are simply too far away from each other and the straight is driven from end to end too quickly.

The hybrid engines are also super expensive. The only reason why we lost manor was the engine costs. We also almost lost sauber and force india. All because of boring overweight road relevance fuel economy.

For the spectator it is important for the cars to sound fast and provide good racing. Hybrids are total failure on both fronts. If you want to be competitive team in f1 you need to be engine manufacturer. Only ferrari and merc can compete. It is truly a 4 car championship. And the only reason is the engine. And the way the hybrids work they make passing more difficult. It makes the cars technically less advanced as racecars because they are slower and overweight. The tech on the car is there because of rules. Not because it has earned its place by making the car faster.

And the sound is poor. F1 used to be attack on senses. The sound should be from other world entirely. Not something that sounds pretty much worse than a sportscar you can buy from dealership.

It's also worth remembering what I was taught in Engineering:

There's a name for what happens when you concentrate a tremendous amount of energy into a small space:

A Bomb.

Does a fuel tank count as a bomb? (it does)

 

[bsmooth]

Actually it is about what we the fans want, thats exactly whats its about for pretty much all of motor racing, for without fans, there wouldn't really be any racing at all. Just sit back and think about it for a minute.
As far as electric goes, its driving the whole automotive industry right now.
But look at the Audi's at Lemans, the same thing came up, yet the Audi's dominated, but they didn't sound like they were going fast. Technology is great, but before we had aerodynamics, racing IMHO was actually better. Cars could get right up close to one another and actual passing did occur. Wings weren't constantly littering the track because there weren't any. Drafting actually worked without assistance.
Yes we are moving forward, yes change is inevetable, but sometimes it doesn't always give the fans what they want.
Yes to me engine noise isn't noise its music
Wind in my hair –
Shifting and drifting –
Mechanical music
Adrenalin surge .
Rush - Red Barchetta

 

[Urlauber]

The solution to this problem is simple and has already been invented some 30 years ago by Mr Sledge Hammer himself: