http://www.leftlanenews.com/eu-calls-on-f1-to-switch-to-four-cylinder-bio-fuel-engines.html

I can't see that happening. Well if they ever do, I'd request that each car uses two I4 engines, welded together at approximately 90 degrees!

What a joke. The materials and computer technology in F1 is already benefiting automotive technology on a more global scale, why turn the tables?

The whole etiquette of F1 since its birth was to be the fastest, most advanced and requiring of skill than any other form of motor sport. There are so many restrictions being brought in to slow them down, now the EU is having a go?!

Madness.

Chris.

i know f1 technology is good but how the hell they going the engines reliable with all that power?

I read this a bit ago, and slowly shook my head in disbelief, then sunk it into my hands.

Formula 1 is not a suitable test bed for production car standards. You know what is? Production cars!

Let the car companies test out new technologies, they're the ones that will be using them.

I guess this is what Formula 1 has come to be. Seeing as though the majority of teams are now company owned (Toyota, BMW, Mercedes' large chunk in McLaren, Honda, Renault, Ferrari (to an extent)), it has now become a link to promoting good environmental practice in cars.

It must sound good to the consumer when he hears that the top level motorsport class uses hybrid technology as it's power source. That way they can get into their hybrid-powered road car and feel special, oblivious to the fact that there was no choice in the matter of power system, and ideally the team would not use it as a power source.

The same applies to this 4 cylinder nonsense. Let's downgrade the engines to 4 pot screamers, so that the engineering used in making them fuel efficient and powerful and whatnot can be somehow used in their production cars. Awesome.

Just leave the sport alone. Enough is enough. Just let it be what it is and stop trying to make it a glorified production car test bed.

I mean, I understand that climate change is a global problem, and that the nature of Formula 1 gives it grand potential for testing various parts to the absolute limit (if the regulations don't standardise them), but what this is essentially doing is putting production cars in front of the sport/business. It's making Formula 1 the lackey. It's the EU approaching the FIA and saying 'Listen here guys, you lot are racing around every two weeks with your high powered fuel guzzlers and putting on a great show, but we'd rather you try and promote the environmental part of the automotive industry a bit more. Why don't you guys put some batteries in their somewhere, like the Prius does, you know how well that things goes!'

I mean, I don't mind at all if the FIA suddenly came out and said 'Ok, we're changing the engine regulations, now you'll be using 4 cylinder engines for 2010.', not at all. But it all goes a bit haywire with me when the reason for doing so is because the EU would rather see Formula 1 spend its time testing production car technologies and not the pinnacle of motorsports like it's supposed to be.

But, perhaps that age is over...

i know f1 technology is good but how the hell they going the engines reliable with all that power?

The engines will have a suitable power output depending on how many races they may end up needing to cover.

I can't see that happening. Well if they ever do, I'd request that each car uses two I4 engines, welded together at approximately 90 degrees!

What a joke. The materials and computer technology in F1 is already benefiting automotive technology on a more global scale, why turn the tables?

The whole etiquette of F1 since its birth was to be the fastest, most advanced and requiring of skill than any other form of motor sport. There are so many restrictions being brought in to slow them down, now the EU is having a go?!

Madness.

Chris.

LMFAO!!!

I personally don't mind 4-bangers, as long as they keep their power and distinct sound, I'm OK.

Bring back the BMW 1.6L turbo inline-4!!! (and imagine a Subaru engine in F1 :D ) And if Subaru gets crazy again (which they aren't really), I'd love it if they attempted to enter an engine into F1 again.....

I really don't like the idea. F1 is a great sport and the cars need great engines. Not 4 bangers.

As Timbit said to leave the sport alone, i must say that i agree with you.

The BMW was a 1.5 engine. You were either allowed a 1.5 forced induction 4 pot, or a 3.0 litre naturally aspirated 4 pot engine, in the 80's turbo era.

However, like a lot have said, fine, bring back the 4 pot. The only problem I have with that is if they keep the same regulations they have now. That means we'll have, if the EU and max mosley gets his own way, half the engine, roughly 450-500 horse power, half the aero, meaning slower cornering speeds, but, no worries, we'll have slicks !!! Oooo, wait, Max Mosley said he ain't sure about that.

I don't understand. I don't understand why Max Mosley is sitting here and being shafted by the world. If I were him, I'd fight tooth and nail for my motorsport to be what it is today. We are on the verge of possibly the greatest season of our generation, with some of the most reliable and capable F1 cars we have ever seen. And for some reason they are still always banging on about how it isn't real racing. Stupid.

I can understand green tech, honestly, it's makes brilliant sense. If anything is going to make motoring cheaper for me because I can get higher mileage, I'll embrace it. However, F1 just so isn't the place for it. Why not use lower formulas ? They are just as capable of doing this as F1, so why focus on the greatest, most advanced racing series ?

F1 won't be the pinnacle in a few years. How fast is A1 GP nowadays ? Come 2009, their speeds are gonna be matched.

requiring of skill than any other form of motor sport.That's not true... sorry.

Maybes it doesn't require the biggest skill, but it is deffinitely the biggest asking of technology in motorsport.

I will somewhat agree with that.

I said what I did because you can't pin one form of motorsport as the most demanding or most difficult. It may look easy on tv but imagine trying to keep 8000 horsepower straight. It's a lot harder than anyone who's never done it can imagine...

Aww piss off EU. F1 has had enough bashing from tree-huggers and people who study leaves for a living. F1 should just ignore this, and introduce their ''green'' technology when they want to.





(Hopefully never, har har har.)

The fun is in overtaking and adrenalin rush. If the cars are 25% slower it won't be 25% less fun. BTW Ferrari is trying to improve fuel economy on their road going cars:
Mr. Di Montezemolo also talked about the increasing need for improved fuel economy — even at a company like Ferrari. He said his company aims to reduce fuel consumption by 30 to 40 percent between now and 2013. He said while technologies like Bio Fuel will help boost fuel economy, the biggest improvements will come from lightweight technology like carbon fiber and aluminum.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/ferrari-ceo-denies-entry-level-rumors-again.html

Oh, bloody hell. Whats up with people always calling to reduce engine cylinders. We've already reduced from V10s to V8s, now they want half that size?

I wouldn't mind 4 bangers, only if the FIA let teams add at least 1 turbocharger to it like in the old days. But 4 bangers, running on bio fuel? No way. I say they just leave it like it is now, it's good enough. The FIA should just ignore it like what Ben said.

Hey! European Union!

Did you know that a single, one-way flight across the Atlantic in Boeing 747 releases significantly more Co2 into the air than an entire season of (pre '08) Formula One? Did you know that?

If you're gonna get on Greenie Bonehead Bandwagon, do something that's actually not completely retarded and GO BUG BOEING!!

or f**k off.

EU flies on jets but they don't race. That's why its easier to cut down polution on races :D

Four-cylinder engines in F1? No thanks.

I reckon giving all engines regulations such as a 3.0-litre N/A engine or a 1.5 turbo or supercharged engine - put caps on the displacement of the engines, not the alignment of them; that being left up to the manufacturers would make it far more interesting; a McLaren 3.0-litre V12 vs. a Ferrari 3.0-litre V8 vs. a BMW 1.5-litre turbocharged V6? Now that sounds fun!

Well according to detroitjoe his G37 requires more torque in the lug nuts than 4 cylinders make so that's way lame.


/sarcasm

I say... what the hell, why not. Just as long as they don't get rid of the real class. Ok, so we know that motorsports makes up a very small portion of carbon emissions and fuel consumption, but I think it's more of the "trend" thing than anything. Manufacturers will start to make high performance bio fuel motors, etc.

I have to disagree w/monkey here.

I lost a good friend last fall. A huge NFL, F1, and Nascar fan; he admitted that an American football game lasts 3-3.5 hours for a regulation 60 minutes of play that rarely lasts more than 15 seconds at a time. He understood that those "little" guys that maintain a pulse rate in excess of 150/min for nearly 2 hours with few breaks were the superior athletes.

8000 hp could kill me by mechanical malfunction or my own ineptitude (or scare me to death!) in a few seconds. Surviving such for years would not make me 10% better qualified for F1.

-----

Years ago I thought that a production stock-block/head 2L I-4 prototype racing series might become a unifying force for international racing. How stupid of me. Unreal race fans want their make to win. Audi oblidged their fans with bazillions of dollars to win for years against trivial privateer competition. The racing was/is BORING!


At the very least it would have convinced GM that the ECOpuke was luzer junk before they made the trash...

Talk about some crystal clutching, flag burning, anti-establishment, two last name hippy, bull crap.

Why can't the dark forces of EnviroFacism just let good things be?

Meh, imagine a 4cyl N/A gas F1..
50,000 rpms. takes probably half a minute just to get up there...and with very little torque.

F1 go-karts??? That's what I imagine if the 4-cylinders become a rule.....

Don't the Formula Audis, BMWs, Renaults, Fords have 4-bangers? The formula Holdens have the V6s, and the GP2 cars (presumably) are powered by something, and that gives the rookies something to work towards in (not really) managable steps.

Maybe if they got more air time (let them all on the track at the same time as the actual F1 race; 5 formulas = good ticket value = massive sales :D), and so the hippys will see that they already exist.

Don't the Formula Audis, BMWs, Renaults, Fords have 4-bangers? The formula Holdens have the V6s, and the GP2 cars (presumably) are powered by something, and that gives the rookies something to work towards in (not really) managable steps.

Maybe if they got more air time (let them all on the track at the same time as the actual F1 race; 5 formulas = good ticket value = massive sales :D), and so the hippys will see that they already exist.


GP2 cars have 4 litre v8's

Meh, imagine a 4cyl N/A gas F1..
50,000 rpms. takes probably half a minute just to get up there...and with very little torque.

Well, they had 1.5L inline 4 turbos in the 80's pushing out in excess of 1200hp in qualifying trim. Keep in mind though that there were no limits as to engine mileage, so if it blew up, no biggy (for the big teams, at least).

As for torque, even current F1 engines have a small amount of torque compared to their power output. Due to their low weight, the engines aren't really designed to be tourqy.

Well, this'll give us Honda boys something to brag about. We all know they'd make a great engine.

Har Har.

Frankly, I don't think it would be the end of the world. If the cars kept going as fast as they do now, what would it matter? They could be powered by 15 hamsters doing blow for all I care as long as the pace stays quick.

EDIT-- just read Frewin's statement. I have to agree with him. Having displacement caps would be a lot more fun.

I will somewhat agree with that.

I said what I did because you can't pin one form of motorsport as the most demanding or most difficult. It may look easy on tv but imagine trying to keep 8000 horsepower straight. It's a lot harder than anyone who's never done it can imagine...

It doesn't really suprise me to be honest. The camber set on the front wheels is usually huge, but I've always though that, if those wheels jump, like off the ground, if you hit the ground again at even slightly the wrong angle, you will crash. Scary.

Even more scary are those top fuel boats. You must have brass balls to drive those things. All it takes is one bad wake and you are almost certainly dead.


However, the skills in F1, and almost any motorsport aren't just the drivers. The people behind the scenes are just as important. Those F1 drivers wouldn't be able to drive their cars if engineers didn't tell them how to control it, just as a Drag Racer couldn't drive his car properly if he didn't understand his engine. It's the skill of the team, not just of the driver, especially now a days in the hay day of technology.

Frankly, I don't think it would be the end of the world. If the cars kept going as fast as they do now, what would it matter? They could be powered by 15 hamsters doing blow for all I care as long as the pace stays quick.

If being the operative word :)

I think the FIA are not trying to standardise the sport across the field, but they are trying to reduce the freedom teams have in the interests of costs. What my fear is, is will the try and standardise the speed?

By that I don't mean will the FIA try and bring the speed sown when the think it's getting to much (a la aerodynamic regulations that came in in 2005, or the V8s in 2006). I mean, reducing ability to develop so much that the pace doesn't seem to progress at all.

But anyway, that's a tad off topic. But while I'm here, displacement cap would be fantastic, but I doubt the FIA would warm to the idea of teams spending money optimising different engine layouts, as much as I hat to say it :(.

Back on topic, and slightly re-iterating myself, I just don't like the way that Formula 1 has become away of testing production car technologies. That is really my only gripe with this.

If being the operative word :)

I think the FIA are not trying to standardise the sport across the field, but they are trying to reduce the freedom teams have in the interests of costs. What my fear is, is will the try and standardise the speed?

By that I don't mean will the FIA try and bring the speed sown when the think it's getting to much (a la aerodynamic regulations that came in in 2005, or the V8s in 2006). I mean, reducing ability to develop so much that the pace doesn't seem to progress at all.

But anyway, that's a tad off topic. But while I'm here, displacement cap would be fantastic, but I doubt the FIA would warm to the idea of teams spending money optimising different engine layouts, as much as I hat to say it :(.

Back on topic, and slightly re-iterating myself, I just don't like the way that Formula 1 has become away of testing production car technologies. That is really my only gripe with this.

It doesn't usually happen, but I have to disagree with you.

From what I've seen, F1 has never been about testing these technologies. F1 has virtually never put anything into it's cars that won't make it faster, unless enforced by the FIA, for safety purposes usually. F1 over the years has made road cars what they are. Imagine road cars without some of the technological advances of F1. I'm not saying it's the bee all and end all, but a lot of tech has come from F1.

We've got to remember there is saughta a trickiling process for cars. Most technologies start in racing, and find their way to cars. I think one of the few things that didn't is ABS. Pretty much everything else, well, that's how it works.

The EU though, have got to remember that the people watching F1 don't want to see this bollocks there talking about, unless it's going to be just as fast, and just as ineresting. if they get there way, they'll just be driving electric bumper cars, cos it's environmentally friendly, and safe. Incidently, I wouldn't mind, cos I might get to race for Mclaren, as I am awesome at the bumpers.

Ferrari F2015:
http://aycu12.webshots.com/image/40491/2000103523444453276_rs.jpg

^^^ that is one sexy kart.... 6.5hp?

anyway....you know who really is to blame here right??? Al Gore, the dude mainstreamed this global warming lets be green unicorn swimming in rainbows crap... and then he gets $1.5mil and a nobel prize.

Ferrari F2015:
http://aycu12.webshots.com/image/40491/2000103523444453276_rs.jpg
hahah, whered you get that from?

I googled Schumacher and go-kart and this showed up, lol

It doesn't usually happen, but I have to disagree with you.

Haha, well, we can't all be of the same opinion, can we? :p

From what I've seen, F1 has never been about testing these technologies. F1 has virtually never put anything into it's cars that won't make it faster, unless enforced by the FIA, for safety purposes usually. F1 over the years has made road cars what they are. Imagine road cars without some of the technological advances of F1. I'm not saying it's the bee all and end all, but a lot of tech has come from F1.

We've got to remember there is saughta a trickiling process for cars. Most technologies start in racing, and find their way to cars. I think one of the few things that didn't is ABS. Pretty much everything else, well, that's how it works.

You bring up some good points, and I am sure that a number of race-born technologies have made their way down to road cars, to the benefit of the automotive industry.

The difference though, I find, that before it was more natural. Before, technologies were born from motorsport for motorsport, and then people in the automotive industry saw what was happening, and started implementing what they saw.

In this case, it's more forced. It's more of a 'We'd like you to change the way you do things for the ultimate gain of the automotive industry', instead of grabbing things that have come about by themselves.

I mean, race car technology is essentially road car technology pushed to the limit. By continually pushing the limit, road cars benefit, and that's great. But it starts to get a bit awry once the road car technology segments starts to dictate the direction the race car technology travels. From an outside point of view, it makes sense, but from a motorsport fan's point of view (speaking of myself, really), it isn't right.

The EU though, have got to remember that the people watching F1 don't want to see this bollocks there talking about, unless it's going to be just as fast, and just as ineresting. if they get there way, they'll just be driving electric bumper cars, cos it's environmentally friendly, and safe. Incidently, I wouldn't mind, cos I might get to race for Mclaren, as I am awesome at the bumpers.

The way I see it, is that the EU really like to push the environmental envelope, we all know that. They also know that motorsport is big in Europe, and that the image of motorsport is that of a lot of fuel spent for unobvious global gains.

They realise that Formula 1 has a huge global presence, and a large following, so they set their plan into action; make F1 green, and you start making blievers out of a lot of people. As a double wammy, the technology implemented in F1 cars gets tested for road car use. Bonus for the EU. So long as these two criteria are met, then they don't car what the cars are like. I think they'd just handball that problem to the FIA.

As for bumper cars, I haven't been on them for ages. I think I'm missing out! :(

Haha, well, we can't all be of the same opinion, can we? :p

haha, be boring otherwise wouldn't it ?


You bring up some good points, and I am sure that a number of race-born technologies have made their way down to road cars, to the benefit of the automotive industry.

The difference though, I find, that before it was more natural. Before, technologies were born from motorsport for motorsport, and then people in the automotive industry saw what was happening, and started implementing what they saw.

In this case, it's more forced. It's more of a 'We'd like you to change the way you do things for the ultimate gain of the automotive industry', instead of grabbing things that have come about by themselves.

I mean, race car technology is essentially road car technology pushed to the limit. By continually pushing the limit, road cars benefit, and that's great. But it starts to get a bit awry once the road car technology segments starts to dictate the direction the race car technology travels. From an outside point of view, it makes sense, but from a motorsport fan's point of view (speaking of myself, really), it isn't right.

I do completely get what you mean now. I do join you in the fact I don't like the idea of the EU dictating what we should do with our beloved racing so they can have nice green road cars. They should start concentrating on getting people out of airplanes, the amount of people on the continent tha use them, but could use trains, and they still pick on us.

However, agai I'd like to ask the question, even if we did end up with 4 bangers ? Would it be that bad ? If it ends up being silly little 400hp(sounds silly, but we are talking F1) then I'll not be pleased. If here turbo mad cars, pumping out 800hp, then I don't mind. The fuel, to me, is irrelevant. Yes, Bioethanol is apparently better, but a lot of people believe it is a better race fuel anyway.

The way I see it, is that the EU really like to push the environmental envelope, we all know that. They also know that motorsport is big in Europe, and that the image of motorsport is that of a lot of fuel spent for unobvious global gains.

They realise that Formula 1 has a huge global presence, and a large following, so they set their plan into action; make F1 green, and you start making blievers out of a lot of people. As a double wammy, the technology implemented in F1 cars gets tested for road car use. Bonus for the EU. So long as these two criteria are met, then they don't car what the cars are like. I think they'd just handball that problem to the FIA.

Pretty much spot on. Myself, I don't have a whole big problem with the green thing, as long as they keep the technology, power, and speed there. Again though, my point on planes, they always target things seen as "unnecessary", such as motorsport. I have a friend whose going to Florida, Fort Lauderdale, for his holiday this year. That, is pointless, expensive, and not green. You don't see the EU in front of the plane with a big stop in the name of penguins sign though do you ?

I am willing to make sacrifices for the planet, if we truly are in the mist of global warming. However, I am not willing to give up my love of motorsport, and that is what they seem to forget. If they drag motorsport down, they'll drag themselves down into a horrible messy pit. People love speed, and people love F1. It is a delicate area that a lot of the EU don't even realise.

As for bumper cars, I haven't been on them for ages. I think I'm missing out! :(

Deffinitely missing out lol. Nothing like geting minor whiplash and not having to fork out the insurance for it.

F**k it , let's try it ... DSG came from F1 , other stuff may come out too .
F1 being fast it's not that important , I mean it makes them more interesting , but what do you benefit from them being fast , or even them being fast with a small engine , or without real fuel .
Think about it ... F1 technicians aren't amateurs , they won't just stay and look if they have have an I4 engine in their hands , they'll try too make the cars faster like they do with the V8s and how they did with the V10s , and eventually those vegetarian I4s will get close to a meat-eating V8 .
That's just my opinion , but if we have vegetarian racing cars people will actually start liking it more and more and will have cleaner cars .
I like speed , but I don't like cities in which you can see the air that you breathe .

What do you mean?

I think that if F1 loses it's speed it will lose it's image and (arguab;e) superiority over other motorsports. It is and always has been the most glamourous and fastest form of motorsports, I think if one of those ingredients is lost, the other will be gone in no time.

In other words, if F1 slowed to a speed below FIA GT racing, it would not be considered the ultimate any more, and would soon lose some of its current interest.

If they have to make cuts then make them elsewhere. Too much research has gone into poaching drivers and motorsports as being the main contributors in climate change when we know there are many other factors. I think that the automotive world is just the easiest target for the green people.

Chris.

I think so too C.A.R , they shouldn't mess with F1 , but the reason because they have F1 on target is the same because it shouldn't be on target . F1 is the most famous motorsport and people are more influenced by it then by GT2 or Drag Racing .
It's like the DSG gear-box ... those who have it go like 'hey , I have a F1-like gear-box' , so if this happens people will go like ' hey , I have a vegetarian car' . Lots of people were against the engine size reduction too , but that didn't stop them from doing ... "if you can't beat them , join them"

With current 2.4-litre engines kicking out around 750-800bhp (let's call it 775 to be 'safe'), that's about 332.9bhp/litre. Working from that, with current technology, naturally-aspirated 1.5-litres will have just under 500bhp.

That doesn't sound good...

It sounds awful, in fact. Even Formula 3 cars have like 600bhp don't they? :-k

Good racing doesn't care how fast it is; and neither do the fans. In the past 2 years; Rolex Grand Am and F1 have produced the best/closest road racing I have seen since IMSA RS Sedans...

Tire, chassis, and aero technolgy continue to advance. The current 2.4L V8 rule is warming fans up for a 4-banger.

Escalating crude oil prices and expanding global warming delusions will make "more Earth-friendly" smaller/I4 engines a good political choice.