Pictures have been released for both the Renault and Mercedes engines.
http://www.carmagblog.co.za/motorspo...s-monza-video/
http://www.ausmotive.com/2013/02/26/...ower-unit.html
Full Member
Pictures have been released for both the Renault and Mercedes engines.
http://www.carmagblog.co.za/motorspo...s-monza-video/
http://www.ausmotive.com/2013/02/26/...ower-unit.html
Full Member
These are not real pictures of the real 2014 engine! That is just PR bull.
Even Stefano said so (he was even willing to bet on it!).
We will just have to wait...
\m/HEAVY METAL\m/
These are computer generated images. Nor real deal!Originally Posted by stuch
Full Member
Where in the world does anyone have that Ferrari are behind and have an weak engine??? Where is the FACTUAL EVIDENCE that Ferrari have a weak engine??? I have not seen anything to indicate that Ferrari have any diffuculties, AT ALL. In fact, there is EVERY reason to believe Ferrari will produce the MOST POWERFUL engine and have the strongest unit. Cooling and Fueling rates will be the limiting factor for ALL Engine on the Grid. Ferrari have the VERY BEST engine people in the industry Engineering their engines & electronics. Contrary to what many people are saying, Ferrari (who is a Company Owned by Fiat), have a HUGE database of Experience and Knowledge of Turbocharging engines. Lets not forget that Ferrari produced one of the Most Powerful Engines in the last F1 Turbocharger Era. The biggest gains since the last Turbo Era in F1 is Electronics and Fuel Injection advancements. Ferrari CURRENTLY have the Most Powerful and Most Efficient, Best Engine in Formula One. I see no valid reason to believe Ferrari are going to have any problems at all with their new Turbocharged Engine. Don't be misled by those talking to just make "Noise". Believe in the FACTS and not just idle talk.
Full Member
With you all the way frankAlfa, I just laugh when some members on the forum saying we are in trouble with 2014 engine, how I see the situation is we have one of the best engine man in the world, if not the best, Luca Marmorini
Ferrari Forever!!!
You tell 'em FrankAlfa!Great comment and I totally agree with everything that you said.
KEEP CALM AND LOVE FERRARI
Registered User
People I don't know if you know this but the Maserati Quattroporte is also built with a 3 liter V6 or V8 twin turbo engine.
Oh yeah , where do you think those engines are built......
Registered User
It's getting better and better :
C/D reports that the supercharged V6 comes from the group that is heading up the development of Ferrari's new 1.6-liter turbocharged six for use in future Formula One racers. This new 420-hp engine is said to be about 30 percent more efficient than the V8 currently found in the Ferrari California. The Quattroporte itself is tipped to be about 450 pounds lighter than its predecessor, which should also help in the efficiency department.
source : http://www.autoblog.com/2012/06/08/m...arged-v6-turb/
Full Member
IMO, performance advantage would be limited due to rules restriction. There are many restriction on the design.
The most important difference would be the fuel efficiency, and reliability. If the most powerful engine is fuel hungry, it would be useless as the driver would have to save fuel and they cannot push during the race. While a fuel efficient engine many not be the king of qualifying, but it's going to have an advantage in the race.
I'm nervous about the engine, hopefully we come out with the best engine that can score us race wins and points
Banned
Frank, obviously you and I are unable to see from mocked up photos and CGA videos that both Mercedes and Renault are clearly the leaders in F1 engine (er...power unit) development. That is to say they are the "virtual" leaders. Unfortunately, for the virtual experts, these virtual engines will never be used in the real world of F1. Maybe someday when the FIA and Sir Bernard's grandchildren reduce F1 to a video game, producing a CGA video of your car lapping at Monza will matter. But until then, real honest-to-God engines made of metal as opposed to pixels are what will determine who wins.
There is one thing that I would change...I would call the new Ferrari V-6, Dino.
Full Member
+1 Agreed!
Full Member
Also I have 170 Multiair engine in my Alfa Giulietta, 1.4 Turbo, great engine, 0 to 60 under 8 seconds, top speed nearly 140 miles per hour. Not bad for 1.4 engine, great fuel economy, also voted engine of the year 2010-2011.People I don't know if you know this but the Maserati Quattroporte is also built with a 3 liter V6 or V8 twin turbo engine.
Oh yeah , where do you think those engines are built......
\m/HEAVY METAL\m/
To be honest I am not bothering at all reading articles saying that Mercedes and Renault are engines to have from next year. All this is, by my opinion, Let's wait first testing and then make conclusions!
Last edited by Rob; 15th September 2013 at 20:46.
Full Member
Just read this on the Internet :
Talk of Ferrari once again using a turbocharged engine dates back all the way to 2008 but even though we’re yet to see the automaker head in that direction, the rumors persist. In fact, we’re expecting Ferrari’s replacement for the California, which is due out next year, to feature a turbocharged engine.
According to Motor Trend most of the automaker’s future lineup will come with a blower. The main reason is stricter emissions and fuel consumption regulations, though a move to turbocharged V-6 engines in Formula One is also a factor.
Ferrari CEO Amedeo Felisa has previously said that half of the automaker’s R&D budget for the next five years would be spent on emissions and efficiency measures, though much of this is also in the area of hybrid technology, which debuts in Ferrari’s LaFerrari flagship.
Ferrari, of course, is no stranger to turbocharging, having quite successfully implemented the technology in its F40 and 288 GTO. However, critics will point out that turbocharged engines are susceptible to turbo lag and a muted exhaust note--both sacrilegious for a modern Ferrari.
While Ferrari’s first modern turbocharged engine is expected to be a V-8, we’re likely to see the Prancing Horse drop to a six-cylinder engine eventually, possibly for its replacement for the 458 Italia.
Note, Ferrari is already building turbocharged V-6 and V-8 engines on behalf of Maserati. These units displace 3.0 liters and 3.8 liters, respectively, and deliver between 325 and 523 horsepower.
Proof of Ferrari Engineering and Technology marching foward with great purpose!
Full Member
Can anyone fluent in German do a proper translation of this article please? http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...n-7720778.html
Here is Google's translation:
turbo engines for 2014, with problems
The engineers are 2014 of the greatest technical challenge of Formula 1 history. Is it maybe too big? Behind the scenes you can hear at Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari immense problems in the development program. Experts say a season ahead with many defects.
Same performance, 30 percent less fuel consumption. A completely new engine concept, two electric motors, one eight-speed transmission. For this, a castrated aerodynamics and little space for the installation of more components. These are the ingredients for the Formula 1 season 2014. Renault engine boss Rob White speaks of "the greatest technical challenge of all time."
Development departments and test areas of Ferrari, Mercedes and Renault, the lights go out no more. End of January 2014 are the first to test drive the new cars and new engines. Under closed doors you can hear that in the current situation no car would get to the finish.
Ferrari has problems with the consumption?
Until now, one has to rely only on rumors. Mercedes and Renault is heard that both have to deal with stability problems. From Ferrari is told that there is problem with the fuel consumption. At the beginning of the year Ferrari had suggested at a meeting of the Technical Working Group to raise the consumption limit of 100 to 110 kilograms. What was of course rejected.
The biggest problem with the engine manufacturers expect the reliability of their drive units. The teams have to make do with five kits per driver per season. A kit consists of basic engine, turbochargers, generators, batteries and power electronics. The individual modules being interchangeable.
Only one component exceeds the quota of five, it goes back five places. 2 elements must be replaced, there are thus already 10 places. When the entire unit 20 places that are due. Many fear that the determination of the grid in the last third of the season for the thesis is.
F1 engines in 2014 it was not clear enough
The teams enter different values for the minimum duration per unit. Ron White tightly calculated. 3600 kilometers should be enough. Mercedes-minders Niki Lauda is 5000 km on as a guide. Supposedly in trial runs of three manufacturers currently no unit has managed more than 3,000 kilometers.
Problem is not the 1.6 liter engine. The runs without complaint. But even with the turbochargers, the difficulties go off at Rob White describes. "A crack in the exhaust may damage the turbine. At today's eight cylinders, only the sound will change."
Niki Lauda, the electric motors and batteries in their sights. The airline specialist compares: "... A highly complicated topic, a battery consists of 170 cells, if not fitted with millimeter accuracy, the same thing happens as in the Boeing Dreamliner, which cancels either a fire, or you have no power."
Of caution with less power
For performance information, all participants enter buttoned. You get to hear only theoretical values. 600 hp for the engine, 160 hp from the electric reserve. This would correspond to the power of the current V8 engines. But it has already heard from 850 hp in qualifying trim. Sure exceeding 700 hp in the race, so that the engines are made to last and with 100 kg fuel (135 liters) come over the distance.
We will therefore see huge horsepower differences in training and races like the old turbo days than were unleashed in training over 1,000 hp, the race could be run with a maximum of 850 hp though? Lauda does not believe: "I assume that the PS difference is closer to 10 than 100 hp in terms of durability, it is better to drive the motor at a constant operating condition as possible.."
Engine cooling a nightmare for chassis designer
Adrian Newey would prefer to fight the non-existent hair. The packing artists and his colleagues are facing their most difficult task. He has not only the engine, with his bulky ancillary units in slimline rear to accommodate, but also a huge intercooler.
"He needs a certain size, because each degree would restrict too much load on the air side of the life of the engine," said Rob White, the dilemma. Then there are the wide expiring exhaust manifold. Again, the engineers are physical limits. The further extend the elbow to the outside, the cooler the entire engine area.
Is thus the bottleneck history? Do not worry. Due to the lower volume of the tank is shorter. Even the V6 turbo saves against a V8 at length. The exhaust manifolds are therefore more forward in a region in which the rear end is not extremely moved.
The wheelbase hardly shorter still. An engineer said: "The gearbox will be back next year for longer by 30 centimeters Not only because of the eighth Many gangs try to control devices and suspension elements to save space in the gear housing to accommodate..." In simple words: From a technical perspective, it is exciting.
Full Member
at least rumors suggests that ferrari is dealing with the consumption. the other two, reliability.
Hell would have broken loose
Banned
It's really starting to sound like 2014 could be ugly, ugly, ugly!
Banned
It is better to run out of fuel than to blow up! QED!
Full Member
I'm going to be very frustrated and disappointed if it becomes a season of luck and conservative rather than real racing.
Full Member
it's pointing to be that way, at least from what we've heard so far...luck, reliability and conservative driving to save fuel and finish the race.....I'm going to be very frustrated and disappointed if it becomes a season of luck and conservative rather than real racing.
what has become of F1 as of late??? i thought F1 was the pinnacle of motorsports racing....GUESS not....thanks A LOT BERNIE you *******....
Last edited by Rob; 16th September 2013 at 20:12. Reason: Pleas no swearing, everyone been told and knows the forum rules.
Forza Ferrari SEMPRE!!!
Registered User
Bernie controls the commercial side of the sport. He doesn't make the rules by any means.... Everyone hates Bernie it seems, but if it weren't for him and his forceful business tactics, F1 probably would have fallen apart years ago. It happened to Indy and champ car when they were racing in the States. The series split in two. F1 has thrived and we should thank Bernie for that, even if he does screw some people over.
Naughty Word Mod
Just reading this on http://www.f1technical.net/features/...8c811b5adbaf5b, really good read.
2014 engines: Heat management
By Steven De Groote on Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:14 pm
This article is an extract of "A lot from a little", an article written by Ian Bamsey and published in Race Engine Technology 071. If you wish to read more, you can buy the issue at highpowermedia.com and put 'f1technical' as voucher code to benefit a 10% reduction on your purchase price.
I recall discussing the development of Group C2 engines with John Nicholson, whose company NME prepared naturally aspirated 3.3 litre Cosworth DFL V8s for a number of competing teams, with great success. Instigated in 1984, Group C2 offered only 330 litres of fuel per 1000 km, compared to 600 litres for C1. Engine management was new in those days, and a ‘fully electronic’ version of the DFL was an essential development by NME to maximise the power available within the tight fuel ration. Equally important, Nicholson emphasised, was appropriate aerodynamic development by the teams – “but some of them accept that more readily than others!”
Our sister publication F1 Race Technology reported in its 2013/14 issue that Force India had taken a new approach to aero development for 2012. Technical director Andrew Green remarked to me, “Basically our new concept concerned the flow structures around the car. I would say that with the 2011 car, our approach was more akin to beating the air into submission as it travelled around the car. This year [2012] we are taking the approach of doing the least amount of work to the air as possible. That’s the philosophy we adopted over the winter.”
That was nothing to do with fuel saving; as of 2012 and 2013 the emphasis is on downforce. The point is that all Formula One teams will need to rethink their aero philosophy under the radically new conditions imposed by the revolutionary 2014 formula. However, equally important will be how they integrate that with the work of their engine supplier (or ‘Power Unit supplier’ as we need to call them from now on). As we shall see, there will be a baffling number of options for operating the new-generation Power Units, each with different implications in terms of overall car aero. The 2014 Power Unit won’t be simply a bolt-in item; more than ever it will be part of a complex juggling act determining overall car performance.
At the heart of the 2014 Power Unit will be a combination of internal combustion (IC) engine and electric motor, the latter powered primarily by energy captured from the exhaust stream of the former.
That stream will power a turbine that both supercharges the engine and drives a motor/generator unit (the ‘MGU-H’), which is permitted to supply electrical energy direct (and in quantities unlimited by regulation) to an electric motor/generator unit (the ‘MGU-K’) coupled directly to the crankshaft of the IC engine.
With its maximum crankshaft speed capped at 15,000 rpm but with plenum pressure unlimited, the direct-injected 1.6 litre V6 turbo is expected to produce in the region of 600 bhp, given a mandated fuel flow limit of 100 kg/h. To that is added a stipulation of 100 kg maximum per race. With races typically being 305 km then, going back to our Group C example, that amounts to 328 kg, or about 460 litres per 1000 km. Group C1 engines produced in the region of 750 bhp; pro rata that is 575 bhp given 460 rather than 600 litres per 1000 km. A quarter of a century on, we would indeed expect these new engines to be a little more efficient.
To the IC output the MGU-K will add (by regulation) a maximum of 161 bhp (120 kW). Its ability to create what is in effect (for the sake of argument) a 761 bhp engine will be limited by the amount of energy the MGU-H can harvest, supplemented by the amount of energy the MGU-K can itself harvest by acting as a generator under braking. That recovered kinetic energy, up to a maximum permitted 2 MJ per lap, will primarily be stored in an energy store (ES), which will normally be a lithium ion battery. Alternatively it can be fed to the MGU-H as a means of driving the compressor.
As the diagram below shows, energy harvested by the MGU-H can be fed either directly to the MGU-K or to the ES, which by regulation can release a maximum of 4 MJ per lap to the MGU-K. Clearly there are a number of potential energy flows, and on top of that there are various ways in which the IC engine can be operated, all with different implications in terms of heat rejection and thus impacting heavily on car aero. Ultimately it is all about the car package, and that is where a tight relationship between Power Unit supplier and team will pay dividends.
As to the overall performance of the Power Unit itself, that will depend a lot on the ability of the system to exploit the potential of the MGU-H, without in turn excessively degrading the output of the IC engine. This hybrid system will be most effective if there is enough energy released through the MGU-K for it not only to top up the IC output to the maximum permitted level but to supplement it to the extent that the IC can be run (as far as possible) within its optimum efficiency band. From what we have gleaned so far, that seems over-optimistic, but at the same time it would appear that there is the potential to run as an effective 761 bhp engine around most of today’s circuits.
But don’t take my word for it. I travelled to Brixworth and Viry Chatillon to talk to engineers developing these new-generation Power Units. On the following pages you will find out what Andy Cowell of Mercedes, and Axel Plasse and Rob White of Renault have to say.
Key points of the 2014 Power Unit and related regulations
• 1600 cc four-stroke V6 with a 90º bank angle and
three con rod journals
• 80 mm bore
• Four valves (minimum stem size 5 mm) per cylinder
• No variable valve timing
• No variable intake trumpets until 2015
• Many revised restrictions on component materials
• Direct injection with maximum operating pressure of
500 bar. Single injector per cylinder
• Single conventional spark plug and single coil per cylinder
• The exhaust may not exit within the vee
• Maximum of two tailpipes with various restrictions on location of exit(s)
• Maximum 15,000 rpm. No limit on manifold pressure
• Sole single-stage turbine and sole single-stage compressor linked by a shaft parallel to the crankshaft axis and within 25 mm of the car’s centreline. No variable turbo-supercharger geometry
• Exhaust gas recirculation now permitted
• Electric motor/generator MGU-H must be mechanically linked to the exhaust turbine, and must run at a fixed speed ratio relative to it; may be clutched. Maximum 125,000 rpm. No limit on its power
• Electric motor/generator MGU-K linked to crankshaft; must run at fixed speed ratio relative to it. Maximum 50,000 rpm. Maximum torque 200 Nm. Maximum power 120 kW (161 bhp)
• Electrical energy store (ES) must be located within the survival cell and must weigh between 20 and 25 kg
• Fuel regulations unchanged
• Standard ECU as today with some scope for control software development
• Fuel flow meter to ensure conformity to maximum flow rates as per accompanying illustration
• Crankshaft must be on the car centreline, 90 mm above the reference plane
• Minimum weight of power unit, 145 kg
• Centre of gravity of engine must lie at least 200 mm above the reference plane
• Standardised engine mountings
• Maximum of five engines per driver for the 2014 season; four for 2015
Talking to Andy Cowell
Designer of naturally aspirated (Cosworth) V10 and (Mercedes) V8 Formula One engines, Andy Cowell is now managing director of Brixworth, England-based Mercedes AMG High Performance Powertrain (HPP) as it prepares its new-generation V6 turbo with integrated energy recovery system. In May I travelled to Brixworth to discuss the 2014 Power Unit with him.
Cowell starts our conversation by remarking, “The fact that there is a maximum quantity of 100 kg of fuel for the race distance – and that’s specified from red lights out at the start of the race to seeing the chequered flag – means we need a 30% improvement in efficiency to obtain the same power output. That’s fundamentally changing the thinking around the engine.
“What will matter in 2014 is the conversion efficiency in the combustion chamber and the reduction in mechanical friction, and then downstream of the IC engine process, the ability not to have [all the] waste energy going down the exhaust system but to harvest as much of that as possible with the single turbine that’s permitted in the regulations. That’s going to be a key aspect – not only the turbocharging but also the electric machine coupled to the turbine.”
Cowell points out that regulation revisions introduced in December 2012 limit the turbocharger to a maximum speed of 125,000 rpm. He is part of the Working Group advising the FIA on the regulations. “As we’ve gone along, what we’ve tried to do is put regulations in to stop us exploring some quirky opportunities,” he says.
“There are reasonably healthy debates, but the fundamental thing is that we all want rules that make us develop new technology applicable to roadcars. We don’t want to come up with something that is just F1-quirky. Whether we’ll manage that or not, we’ll see. “We’ll have a 160 hp [120 kW] electric motor [the MGU-K], which is challenging, and a motor/generator unit [the MGU-H] connected to the turbocharger, which is challenging as well. But interesting technology.”
Images by Renault Sport F1 / Race Engine Technology
CAVALLINO RAMPANTE PER SEMPRE
Ferrari Forever!!!
I wouldn't be surprised at all if in the first race of the season in Australia most cars would retire with engine blow-ups. We can only hope that our cars won't be among them. I believe reliability is going to be the most important aspect next season.
KEEP CALM AND LOVE FERRARI
Full Member
I am not looking forward to the changes. personally I would rather see less aero and more HP but I guess that era is long gone.
Full Member
I am sure we'll see a very reliable V6 engine and perhaps one of the most reliable! All of these rumors and just rumors.. The tech information in Racecar Engineering from Renault is correct and the rest is just speculation.. Look for Ferrari to be fighting for the championship again this coming year.
President, Scuderia Ferrari Club of Denver - The Official Passion
http://www.scuderiaferrari.club
denver@scuderiaferrari.club
Ferrari Forever!!!
I really hope you're right fratello.
It's time to take the Bull down!
KEEP CALM AND LOVE FERRARI
Full Member
Masers do use Ferrari engines.
Great article Rob.
Full Member
What are you doibg FIA!
Sole suppliers are nothing new to Formula 1. Pirelli has an exclusive contract to supply identical tyres to all 11 teams. Before that, Bridgestone did the same. It's a move aimed at closing the field. Removing a differentiator which could potentially give certain teams an advantage over another. The FIA might be about to do the same with fuel and oil. At present, the teams are allowed to choose which oil company supplies them and often in return they are paid millions by said company to display its logos on their cars. Red Bull has Total, Ferrari has Shell, McLaren has Mobil 1, Mercedes has Petronas, Williams has PDVSA, Toro Rosso has Cepsa and the list goes on. However, a finer detail in the World Motor Sport Council's statement following a meeting on Friday suggests that might be about to change. "One of the noteworthy aspects of the new 2013 Concorde Agreement is the new tender procedure for appointing single suppliers in the tyre and fuel categories, for the FIA F1 World Championship," it read. This could have major implications for the teams and could potentially result in the loss of significant sponsorship money as an oil company won't be too happy sponsoring a rival who's fuel is powering the car which bares its logo. The tender process won't be introduced until the end of the 2014 season, but the FIA can expect some retaliation if it goes ahead. - See more at: http://www.f1times.co.uk/news/displa....EnRB3X91.dpuf
Banned
I may be wrong about this, but is this part of the technical regulations? Because if it is, then Ferrari has veto powers of it, and they can reject it.
They had veto power over the engines as well, and did nothing, though. I guess SD has no courage whatsoever.
Why on Earth would the FIA try to get a single fuel supplier involved? I never read anything about teams complaining that their rivals are using illegal fuel or anything like that.
The ball is in Ferrari's court on this one. Do they have the balls to veto the change?
Full Member
If I recalled correctly, the teams had no power in stopping the originally proposed twin turbo 4 cylinder engine.
We were not happy, Bernie himself was not happy. However, it took a threat from the circuit owners to finally change the FIA's mind and a compromise was reached with the now V6 single turbo engine.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks