yes i can
yes i can
No, they were absolutely stock BMW 1500 4 pot blocks. Not only that, but they only used blocks that had been used for over 100,000 miles - the rationale being that if they were going to break they would've done before then.
They were also left outside to "weather" for a few weeks before assembly. So the story goes apparently the BMW technicians used to pee on them aswell - something to do with the acidic nature of urine.
Up to 1300 bhp - incredible. I believe they suffered from a bit of lag though.
Yes, I'm quite aware of those issues too, though I didn't feel like posting a super long post to cover all bases I could think of at the time. With peak energy flow rates, what we need is just some sort of mechanism to effectively restrict say fuel flow of petrol/diesel based on rate of potential energy flow. This could be say a fuel valve that is absolutely mandatory, like the boost limiters on CART racers. It would be designed so that any tampering would be detected. All are free to develop their engines any engines they want, but they engines must have fuel systems designed to receive the energy flow-rate restrictor which will be mounted just before the race. The system will be a closed loop design and electronically controlled with permanent programming, so any attempt to mess with it just a short time before the race and cheating is minimal. Given that peak fuel flow rate is always restricted in race conditions and conservaton of energy applies, this could really work.
On point 2, I'm fully aware that it's powerbands that win races, and as far as I'm concerned the increase of are under the curve even when peak power is limited is a GOOD thing. This would stop the silly quests for ever higher peak power and even sillier revs. If it wasn't for the current peak rev limit, revs would go up to 24,000rpm! With con-rods stretching as much as 1mm in current engines, what's the point? Last time I checked, F-1 engines had a failure rate of about 30% in 2006. And ways to improve area under the curve whilst making the most of limited potential energy intake rate are all so relevant to road car technological goals as well. Another reason to justify the obscene amounts of money and human resources spent on something that's currently a technological dinosaur in many important ways and absolutely irrelevant to improving automotive technology.
Speeds should be allowed to be as fast as necessary to keep them at the pinnacle of racing (aka fastest open wheelers if not fastest tarmac circuit car). But, if speeds do go insane say up to 400km/h, peak energy intake rate would be reduced further. This would force engineers to seek speed via improved efficiency, not brute force and more energy expenditure.
Absolutely free tech would be a race engineer's dream (like me
), but that is a VERY dangerous. Cars would simply get so fast that they could literally crush non g-suited drivers in today's 'low tech" with shear acceleration. No current circuits would be able to keep them under manageable speeds. And as energy efficiency gets more relevant to long term well being of humankind, unlimited energy use would soon render motorsports as legally and socially acceptable as heroin abuse.they where rumors , it was also rumored that they ran the cars into the redline as much as they could to see how long it would last , the throttle connection and tyres burst but the engine block is fine
hence why the new bmw m3 m5 and m6 use the old 1970's bmw m1 motor , slightly updated tho
Don't take those stories too seriously I'm pretty certain they were not used blocks whatever BMW may like you to think.
I'm still not convinced that engine power needs to be limited, cars and tracks today are safer than they ever have been and even when CanAm/turbo cars were producing over 1000 bhp in race trim people didn't start dropping like flies. Simply not crashing is the easiest way to make motor racing safer and F1 drivers don't try very hard to avoid it these days.
BTW are you sure F1 cars have a rev limit and if it did (which I'm fairly sure it doesn't) how the hell do the FIA enforce it?
Yup - 19,000rpm this year. No idea how they enforce it though - perhaps acoustic analysis (which is very powerful).
wow, way to descriminate against thousands of people
No TC is gonna bring out the best drivers. Hell they should bring back clutches too!
Because modern F1 cars have the gearbox directly fed from the engine, and so cannot stop without stalling....
/sarcasm
F1 cars still have clutches mate
/sarcasm
F1 cars still have clutches mate
Eh?
Well a foot pedal for the clutch
They have a finger lever.
But if you are suggesting a return to H-gate gears, or even stick sequential, then that gets my vote!
But if you are suggesting a return to H-gate gears, or even stick sequential, then that gets my vote!
I'd like to see H gates return along with losing pitstops and clutches, seriously starting the car on the grid lifted with a pair of air jacks would reduce the drivetrain loss enormously and with no chance of stopping and clutchless shifts it would require real skill.
Yeh, either of them!
No, they don't.
I'm glad to see the banning of traction control, as much for the spectacle as for the increase on driver skill.
Anyway, I just got a book this morning called "The World Of Formula One" first printed in 1989 and it's got a small, interesting section on turbo power with a few figures. Here it is:
"FISA's cause for concern over the power race was justified. Ferrari's 120-degree V6, for example, had around 580bhp at 11,000rpm in 1981, which was increased over the following four years to over 900bhp at 12,000rpm in qualifying form at 1985's 3.5-bar figure. At the same time the trusty Cosworth DFY could only muster 510 at 11,000, an improvement of around 40bhp over a similar period. By 1986 the V6 Hondas were regularly qualifying with over 1100bhp and more than 4-bar boost, while racing with 850 to 900 depending on the effect of a given circuit on fuel economy. The M12/13 upright four-cylinder BMW in Benetton's B186 was probably the most powerful of them all and frequently ran 5.3-bar boost in qualifying. However you calculated it, that gave them raw horsepower, generally reckoned to be close to 1300bhp."
Anyway, I just got a book this morning called "The World Of Formula One" first printed in 1989 and it's got a small, interesting section on turbo power with a few figures. Here it is:
"FISA's cause for concern over the power race was justified. Ferrari's 120-degree V6, for example, had around 580bhp at 11,000rpm in 1981, which was increased over the following four years to over 900bhp at 12,000rpm in qualifying form at 1985's 3.5-bar figure. At the same time the trusty Cosworth DFY could only muster 510 at 11,000, an improvement of around 40bhp over a similar period. By 1986 the V6 Hondas were regularly qualifying with over 1100bhp and more than 4-bar boost, while racing with 850 to 900 depending on the effect of a given circuit on fuel economy. The M12/13 upright four-cylinder BMW in Benetton's B186 was probably the most powerful of them all and frequently ran 5.3-bar boost in qualifying. However you calculated it, that gave them raw horsepower, generally reckoned to be close to 1300bhp."
(F1) Traction Control Banned for 2008
(116 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG